GIFT  OF  * 


UNIVERSITY    OF    CALIFORNIA    PUBLICATIONS 

IN 

CLASSICAL    PHILOLOGY 

Vol.  2,  No.  9,  pp.  173-226  June  1,  1912 


NOTES   ON  THE  TEXT  OF  THE 
CORPUS  TIBULLIANUM 


BY 

MONROE  E.  DEUTSCH 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  PRESS 
BERKELEY 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  PUBLICATIONS. 

Note. — The  University  of  California  Publications  are  offered  in  exchange  for  the  publi- 
cations of  learned  societies  and  institutions,  universities,  and  libraries.  Complete  lists  of 
all  the  publications  of  the  University  will  be  sent  upon  request.  For  sample  copies,  lists 
of  publications  or  other  information,  address  the  MANAGER  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY 
PRESS,  BERKELEY,  CALIFORNIA,  U.  S.  A.  All  matter  sent  in  exchange  should  be 
addressed  to  THE  EXCHANGE  DEPARTMENT,  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY,  BERKELEY, 
CALIFORNIA,  U.  S.  A. 

CLASSICAL  PHILOLOGY.— Edward  B.  Clapp,  William  A.  Merrill,  Herbert  0.  Nutting, 
Editors.    Price  per  volume  $2.50. 

Cited  as  Univ.  Calif.  Publ.  Class.  Phil. 

Vol.  1.    1.  Hiatus  in  Greek  Melic  Poetry,  by  Edward  Bull  Clapp.    Pp.  1-34.    June, 

1904 ~ - ?0.50 

2.  Studies  in  the  Si-Clause.    I.  Concessive  Si-Clauses  in  Plautus.    H.  Sub- 

junctive Protasis  and  Indicative  Apodosis  in  Plautus.    By  Herbert  O. 
Nutting.    Pp.  35-94.    January,  1905 _ _ 60 

3.  The  Whence  and  Whither  of  the  Modern  Science  of  Language,  by  Ben}. 

Ide  Wheeler.    Pp.  95-109.    May,  1905 .25 

4.  On  the  Relation  of  Horace  to  Lucretius,  by  William  A.  Merrill.    Pp. 

111-129.     October,  1905  _ .26 

5.  The  Priests  of  Asklepios,  a  New  Method  of  Dating  Athenian  Archons, 

by  William  Scott  Ferguson.    Pp.  131-173.    April  14,  1906  (reprinted 
September,  1907)  _ - , .50 

6.  Horace's  Alcaic  Strophe,  by  Leon   Josiah  Richardson.      Pp.    175-201. 

March,  1907 _ 26 

7.  Some  Phases  of  the  Relation  of  Thought  to  Verse  in  Plautus,  by  Henry 

Washington  Prescott.    Pp.  205-262.    June,  1907 _ .69 

Index,  pp.  263-270. 
Vol.  2.    1.  Some  Textual  Criticisms  on  the  Eighth  Book  of  the  De  Vita  Caesarum 
of  Suetonius,  by  William  Hardy  Alexander.    Pp.  1-33.    November, 
1903 30 

2.  Cicero's  Knowledge  of  Lucretius 's  Poem,  by  William  A.  Merrill.    Pp. 

35-42.     September,  1909  10 

3.  The  Conspiracy  at  Rome  in  66-65  B.C.,  by  H.  C.  Nutting.     January, 
1910    10 

4.  On  the  Contracted  Genitive  in  I  in  Latin,  by  William  A.  Merrill.    Pp. 

57-79.    February,  1910  _ 25 

5.  Epaphos  and  the  Egyptian  Apis,  by  Ivan  M.  Linforth.     Pp.  81-92. 

August,  1910 10 

6.  Studies  in  the  Text  of  Lucretius,  by  William  A.  Merrill.    Pp.  93-150. 

June,  1911  50 

7.  The  Separation  of  the  Attributive  Adjective  from  its  Substantive  in 

Plautus,  by  Winthrop  L.  Keep.    Pp.  151-164.    June,  1911  15 

8.  The   'OapiuTis  of  Theorrjws,  T>y  Edward  B.  Clapp.    Pp.  165-171.    Oc- 

tober,  1911 15 

9.  Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibnllianum,  by  Monroe  E.  Deutsch. 

Pp.  173-226,     J.a>e,  1912  50 

GRAECO-ROMAN  ARCHAEOLOGY.     (Quarto.) 

Vol.  1.  The  Tebtunis  Papyri  Part  1.  Edited  by  Bernard  P.  Grenfelh  Arthur  S. 
Hunt,  and  J.  Gilbart  Smyly.  xix  -+-  674  pages,  with  9  collotype  plates. 
1902.  £2  5s,  $16. 
Vol.  2.  The  Tebtunis  Papyri,  Part  2.  Edited  by  Bernard  P.  Grenf ell  and  Arthur 
S.  Hunt,  with  the  assistance  of  Edgar  J.  Goodspeed.  xvi+485  pages 
and  2  collotype  plates,  with  map.  1907. 
Vol.  3.    The  Tebtunis  Papyri,  Part  3.    Edited  by  Bernard  P.  Grenfelh  Arthur  S. 

Hunt,  and  J.  Gilbart  Einyly.     (In  preparation.) 
For  sale  by  the  Oxford  University  Press  (Henry  Frowde),  Amen  Corner,  London, 
E.O.     (£2  5s),  and  91-93  Fifth  avenue,  New  York  ($16).    Copies  for  exchange  may  be 
obtained  from  the  University  Press,  Berkeley. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA   PUBLICATIONS 


CLASSICAL    PHILOLOGY 

Vol.  2,  No.  9,  pp.  173-226 


June  1,  1912 


NOTES   ON  THE   TEXT  OF  THE 
CORPUS  TIBULLIANUM 

BY 

MONEOE   E.   DEUTSCH 


PREFACE 

The  following  paper  was  submitted  to  the  faculty  of  the 
University  of  California  in  August,  1910,  as  a  dissertation  for 
the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy.  Since  that  time  it  has  been 
revised  somewhat,  but  it  is  essentially  unchanged  from  its 
original  form. 

I  desire  to  acknowledge  here  my  great  indebtedness  to 
Professor  William  A.  Merrill,  to  whom  I  owe  my  instruction  in 
the  field  of  textual  criticism. 

Monroe  E.  Deutsch. 

Berkeley,  California,  December,  1911. 


ASS 
I, 

3A< 

2, 

jrES    - 

88. 

Dig 

•CUSS] 

I, 

5, 

76. 

I, 

6, 

7. 

I, 

9, 

25. 

I, 

10 

,  37. 

II, 

2, 

17-2S 

; 

II, 

3, 

61. 

II, 

4, 

43. 

II, 

5, 

47. 

III, 

6, 

3. 

III, 

12 

(IV, 

6), 

19-20 

III, 

14 

(IV, 

8), 

5-6 

244548 


174  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 


I,  2,  88 
Proposed  reading: 

at  tu,  qui  laetus  rides  mala  nostra,  caveto 
mox  tibi :  non  mi  uni  saeviet  usque  deus. 

Here  A V  and  6  unite  in  reading  non  unus;  P,  et  iratus;  and 
£,  non  vanus.  None  of  these  seems  possible  here ;  so  the  majority 
of  the  editors  follow  the  early  Italian  scholars  in  reading  non 
uni.1  The  change  from  uni  to  unus  is  thus  explained  by  Belling, 
Prolegomena,  p.  39,  note:  "Der  libr.  arch,  schrieb  unus,  da  in 
seiner  Vorlage  t  das  i  dem  Abkurzungszeichen  fur  us  ahnlich 
sah."  Heyne  easily  accounts  for  it  thus:  "Scilicet  primum  s 
adhaeserat  ex  sequenti  voce:  turn  unis  mutatum  fuisset  in  unus." 

As  to  the  interpretation  of  uni,  Golbery  declares :  ' '  Sensus 
est :  Amor  non  uni  mihi,  sed  et  tibi  saeviet,  quamvis  me  nunc 
laetus  irrideas. "  The  sense  is  perfectly  good,  but  does  Tibullus 
ever  use  unus  in  this  way?  The  following  are  the  instances  of 
the  word  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum : 

I,  6,  23  illam    sequar    unus  III,  6,  32  una  serena  dies. 

ad  aras.  Ill,  19  (IV,  13),  5  uni  mihi. 

I,  2,  9  uni  mihi.  Ill,  10   (IV,  4),   19  in  uno 

I,  2,  58  de  me  uno.  corpore. 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  142  una  per 
ostia  (Heinsius). 

In  other  words,  unus  is  never  used  substantively  in  the  Corpus 
Tibullianum,  and  of  the  six  well-authenticated  instances  of  the 
word,  four  show  it  modifying  some  form  of  ego.  Moreover,  in 
the  elegies  of  Tibullus  himself  (if  we  assume  III,  19  to  be  by 
Tibullus),  four  of  these  six  uses  of  unus  occur,  in  all  of  which 
unus  modifies  some  form  of  ego.  This  makes  the  substantive  use 
appear  improbable  here. 

Moreover,   the  substantive  use  of  adjectives   in  the   dative 


i  However,  among  the  other  suggestions  are :  uni  is — Goerenz ;  unis — F. 
W.  Eichter  (in  vers.  German.  1831);  vacuus — Huschke;  in  me — Hiller  (but 
Hiller  reads  non  unus  in  Corpus  poetarum  Latinorum,  1893)  ;  ullus — Rabus 
(Observationes  in  Tibulli  carmina,  p.  6.  Aug.  Vind.  1837);  in  nos — Leo 
(Philol.  Unters.  2[1881],  p.  39);  "caveto:  mox  tibi  nam  durus  saeviet 
usque  deus" — Fr.  A.  Rigler;  "caveto:  mox  tibi  iam  lusus  saeviet  usque 
deus" — Kemper  (Quaest.  Tibull.,  Monasterii,  1857,  p.  46);  mitis — Baehrens. 


1912]         Beutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  175 

singular  is  rare  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  The  following  list 
includes  all  instances  wherein  an  adjective  in  the  dative  singular 
stands  alone,  whether  it  is  used  substantively  or  the  noun  which 
it  modifies  is  to  be  supplied  from  the  preceding  clause  :2 


absenti 

I,  8,  53. 

amanti 

I,  3,  65;  I,  5,  57;  II,  4,  15. 

anhelanti 

I,  8,  37. 

avarae 

II,  4,  35. 

fatenti 

I,  6,  29. 

fesso 

I,  10,  42. 

formosae 

Ill,  10  (IV,  4),  4. 

misero 

I,  6,  2;  I,  8,  23;  II,  4,  4;  III,  19  (IV,  13),  20. 

nulli 

I,  6,  77;  III,  5,  7. 

roganti 

I,  4,  55. 

securae 

II,  4,  50  (dative  or  genitive). 

sopitae 

II,  6,  38. 

suae 

I,  4,  75;  II,  5,  103. 

tardo 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  92. 

tenero 

I,  8,  51. 

Of  these  twenty-two  instances,  but  nineteen  are  in  Tibullus'  own 
elegies  (even  if  one  assumes  III,  19  to  be  his).  It  will  be  further 
noted  that  of  these  nineteen,  eight  are  participles;  among  the 
remaining  eleven,  comprising  as  they  do  all  instances  wherein 
the  adjective  in  this  form  stands  alone,  we  find  misero  used  four 
times,  and  suae  twice.  If  these  were  set  aside  from  the  list,  but 
five  isolated  examples  would  remain  in  the  elegies  of  Tibullus. 
But  even  if  we  take  the  whole  list,  exclusive  of  participles,  the 
number  is  exceedingly  small,  too  small  to  justify  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  substantive  use  of  an  adjective  which  is  never  used 
substantively  in  the  whole  Corpus  Tibullianum. 

Aside  from  this  objection  to  the  use  of  uni  alone,  the  usual 
reading  would  demand  for  uni  the  meaning  of  "one  and  the 
same  man,"  a  meaning  not  found  in  Tibullus. 

On  the  other  hand,  as  the  instances  of  Tibullus'  use  of  unus 
show,  we  should  expect  it  to  modify  some  form  of  ego.  More- 
over, the  meaning  of  the  passage  demands  something  that  is 
equivalent  to  "uni  mihi"  (quoting  from  Golbery's  note),  which 


2  Based  upon  the  Index  Verborum  in  Hiller's  edition. 


176  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

very  group  of  words  is  found  twice  in  Tibullus.  With  this 
thought  I  have  suggested  the  insertion  of  mi  before  uni;  we  have 
then  exactly  the  phrasing  that  fits  the  sense  of  the  passage. 

It  is  true  that  the  form  mi  is  not  found  in  the  Corpus  Tibul- 
lianum.  In  Propertius,3  however,  the  shorter  form  is  found  in 
I,  12,  19;  II,  18,  30;  II,  22,  1;  II,  22,  18;  II,  30,  25;  IV,  1,  62; 
IV,  8,  53;  IV,  11,  47.  In  Catullus4  the  use  is  exceedingly  fre- 
quent. Lucretius  employs  mi  in  I,  924  and  III,  105 ;  it  appears 
in  the  Aeneid  VI,  104  and  123.  That  the  form  never  appears  in 
the  Corpus  Tibullianum  as  we  now  find  it,  is  after  all  not  strange, 
when  one  notes  these  figures : 

Propertius.s         Corpus  Tibullianum.s 
me  (ablative)  41  11 

That  is,  the  ratio  of  the  uses  of  me  (ablative)  in  the  Corpus 
Tibullianum  to  the  uses  in  Propertius  is  11 :  41.  Propertius  using 
mi  but  eight  times,  at  this  same  ratio  the  Corpus  Tibullianum 
would  contain  mi  only  twice  and  a  fraction.  In  other  words,  mi 
should  by  no  means  be  expected  frequently  in  the  Corpus. 

The  elision  of  the  monosyllable  which  the  proposed  reading 
would  introduce,  has  the  following  parallels  in  our  text : 

I,  2,  56  si  in.  Ill,  6,  25,  qua  est. 

I,  2,  58  me  uno.  Ill,  7   (IV,  1),  75  si  inter- 

I,  4,  56  se  implicuisse.  rupto. 

I,  6,  59  te  adducit.  Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  179  se  accin- 

I,  6,  61  me  adfixa.  gere. 

I,  7,  9  me  est   (sine  marte  III,  7  (IV,  1),  182  me  ad- 

ibi — Baehrens).  versa. 

II,  1,  69  se  exercuit.  Ill,  19  (IV,  13),  19  me  au- 
II,  3,  5  cum  aspicerem  (dum  dacius. 

— Heyne). 
II,  3,  61  qui  abducis  (text 
uncertain). 

Of  these  fourteen  instances  ten  are  in  Tibullus,6  one  in  Lygdamus, 
and  three  in  the  Panegyric;  it  will  be  further  noted  that,  of  the 
ten  in  Tibullus,  seven  involve  personal  or  reflexive  pronouns. 


3  J.  S.  Phillimore,  Index  Verborum  Propertianus. 
*  Neue- Wagener,  Formenlehre,  II,  349  foil, 
s  Index  Verborum  in  Hiller,  Albii  Tibulli  Elegiae. 
6  If  we  assume  III,  19  to  be  by  Tibullus. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  177 

The  elision  of  the  monosyllable  has  therefore  sufficient  warrant 
in  the  usage  of  Tibullus.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  proposed 
reading,  as  to  elision  and  word-order,  exactly  parallels  me  uno, 
Tib.  I,  2,  58. 

As  mi  is  not  found  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum,  for  examples 
of  elided  mi  we  shall  have  to  look  elsewhere.  They  are  frequent 
enough,  e.g.  Lucr.  I,  924 ;  Hor.  Serm.  I,  1,  101 ;  I,  2,  57 ;  I,  3,  23 ; 
I,  4,  108 ;  I,  9,  50 ;  II,  6,  27 ;  Hor.  Epist.  I,  18,  112. 

That  mi  could  be  readily  omitted  in  MSS  (1)  because  elided 
and  (2)  because  written  in  compendium,  is  readily  apparent. 
For  example,  on  Horace  Serm.  I,  9,  50  (nil  mi  officii,  inquam) 
Orelli  's  apparatus  criticus  contains  the  statement : 

mi  a-yRo- 

mihi  F 

omisit  g(  Codex  Gothanus,  B61). 

Again,  Ennius  in  C.ic.  de  Oratore  III,  58,  218  reads  :7  Turn  pavor 
sapientiam  omnem  mi  exanimato  expectorat.  The  MSS  read 
thus:  "mihi  L,  mi  P,  om.  M."  It  is  of  interest  that  in  both  of 
these  instances  mi  suffers  elision. 

If  it  be  further  objected  that  we  should  then  have  but  a 
solitary  instance  of  mi  in  the  whole  Corpus  Tibullianum,  it  might 
be  noted  that  there  is  but  one  instance  in  Persius,  I,  2.8 

The  use  of  the  dative  case  (uni  or  mi  uni)  with  saevire  has 
always  been  defended  by  Ov.  Her.  IV,  148  qui  mihi  nunc  saevit, 
sic  tibi  parcat  Amor.  But  Leo9  objects  to  its  use,  brushing  aside 
this  instance  by  declaring  that  mihi  saevit  is  influenced  by  tibi 
parcat.  In  reply  it  -might  be  noted  that  mihi  saevit  precedes 
tibi  parcat,  and  hence  would  not  be  so  likely  to  be  influenced  by 
the  construction  with  parcere  as  if  the  reverse  order  were  found ; 
moreover,  in  the  text  before  us  we  have  caveto  tibi,  a  use  of 
the  dative  which  is  not  uncommon;  according  to  Leo's  reason- 
ing, then,  it  would  not  be  surprising  if  this  use  of  the  dative 
influenced  the  other  construction  so  as  to  read  mi  uni  saeviet. 


i  Mueller-Friedrich. 

s  ' '  Vocabula  Satirarum  Persii '  *  in  Auli  Persii  Flacci  Satirarum  Liber, 
edidit  Otto  Iahn. 

9  F.  Leo,  Phil.  Unters.,  II,  34-9. 


178  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

For  in  this  passage  the  dative  with  cavere  precedes  and  would 
therefore  far  more  easily  influence  the  construction  with  saevire. 
Leo's  second  objection  to  the  usual  reading  is  that,  even  if  the 
dative  were  used,  he  would  expect  nobis.  This  expectation  is  due, 
I  presume,  to  mala  nostra  of  the  preceding  verse.  Compare  how- 
ever the  following  passages : 

I,  2,  11-12  Et  mala  si  qua  tibi  dixit  dementia  nostra, 
ignoscas:  capiti  sint  precor  ilia  meo. 

I,  4,  77-8  me,  qui  spernentur,  amantes 

consultent:  cunctis  ianua  nostra  patet. 

So  also  I,  5  41  me  and  I,  5,  44  nostra  puella;  and  I,  9,  42-3  ipse 
tuli!  and  munere  nostro.  These  are  but  instances,  selected  at 
random,  of  what  is  common  in  Tibullus. 

Finally,  we  should  quite  expect  mi  set  off  against  tibi,  for  this 
is  not  uncommon  in  Tibullus  :10 

I,  2,  97  At  mihi  parce,  Venus :  semper  tibi  dedita,  etc. 
I,  1,  59  te  spectem,  suprema  mihi  cum  venerit  hora. 
I,  6,  3  quid  tibi  saevitiae  mecum  est? 

Cf .  also  Hor.  Serm.  I,  4,  116  causas  reddet  tibi ;  mi  satis  est,  etc. 
I  should  accordingly  read  uni  with  the  editors,  but  insert  mi 
before  it. 

I,  5,  76 
Proposed  reading: 

utere  quaeso, 
dum  licet :  in  liquida  nam  tibi  linter  aqua  est. 

AV  read  as  above,  though  without  est;  G  also  omits  est,  and 
substitutes  for  nam  the  verb  nat,  which  is  likewise  the  reading  of 
Vm2  in  the  margin.  This  last  reading  is  accepted  by  practically 
all  editors  of  Tibullus.  Guyet  proposed  stat  tibi,  which  was 
suggested  by  Prop.  II,  9,  30  ant  mea  si  staret  navis  in  Oceano. 
Rossberg11  would  read  nunc  for  nam.12  Nam  is  approved  by 
Maurenbrecher,13  who  quotes  the   readings  of  the  MSS  thus : 


io  So  too  in  this  distich  tu  and  rides  are  set  off  against  mala  nostra. 
^Jahrb.  f.  Philol.,  119  (1879),  p.  77. 

12  Cf.  the  variant  readings  in  II,  4,  12:  nunc  P,  nam  A,  iam  f. 
is  Philologus,  55  (1896),  439. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  179 

"nat  G,  nam  AV,  was  ohne  Anstoss  ist."  Belling14  in  his  text 
reads  nam,  without  adding  est,  however,  which  seems  to  me 
essential  to  the  verse.  Cartault13  reads  non,  and  Heyne  suggested 
that  if  nam  be  retained,  we  should  read  "it  liquida  nam  tibi 
linter  aqua." 

The  change  from  nam  to  nat  is  easily  understood.  The  posi- 
tion of  nam  as  the  third  word  in  its  clause  would  seem  impossible ; 
the  t  beginning  tibi  would  influence  the  change  of  nam  to  nat, 
especially  since  this  verb  would  appear  fitting  with  linter.  The 
clause  being  thus  supplied  with  a  verb,  est  would  naturally  be 
dropped.  This  loss  would  be  made  easier  by  the  fact  that  the 
verse  is  a  rather  long  one  for  a  pentameter.16 

It  is  true  that  nam  stands  first  in  its  clause  in  practically 

every  instance  of  its  use  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.     But  we 

read  as  follows  in  III,  4,  43-4 : 

salve,  cura  deum:  casto  nam  rite  poetae 

Phoebusque  et  Bacchus  Pieridesque  favent. 

And  in  II,  4,  12  the  reading  of  A  is  perfectly  acceptable : 

omnia  nam  tristi  tempora  f  elle  madent. 

Some  editors,  however,  read  nunc17  and  others  iam.18     In  other 

words,  in  three  separate  passages  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum,  A 

reads  nam  in  a  position  subsequent  to  the  first    in  its  clause ;  of 

these  one  is  accepted  by  the  editors,  a  second  by  a  number,  and 

a  third  rejected  by  practically  all.    If  we  can  accept  the  authority 

of  A  in  III,  4,  43  for  a  deferred  nam,  the  postponement  of  nam 

should  not  in  itself  be  an  argument  for  the  change  here,  when 

resting  on  the  same  MS  authority. 

Moreover,  deferred  nam  is  sufficiently  common  in  the  other 

poets  of  the  period.    We  find  the  following  instances  :19 


i*  H.  Belling,  Albius  Tibullus,  Untersuchung  und  Text,  Berlin,  1897.  Cf. 
his  argument  for  nam  in  his  Prolegomena,  p.  63. 

15  Tibulle  et  les  auteurs  du  corpus  Tibullianum.    Paris,  1909. 

!«  For  those  MSS  (AV)  that  read  nam  we  should  only  have  to  explain 
the  loss  of  est.  The  length  of  the  verse  has  already  been  mentioned,  and 
the  ease  with  which  est  is  dropped  may  be  seen  by  noting  the  instances 
of  such  loss  mentioned  on  page  183. 

l*  e.g.  Baehrens,  Haupt-Vahlen,  Hiller. 

is  e.g.  Broukhusius,  Heyne,  Voss,  L.  Mueller. 

is  Emilius  Schuenke,  De  traiectione  coniunctionum  et  pronominis  relativi 
apud  poetas  Latinos,  Kiliae,  1906. 


180  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

Catullus  XXIII,  7  nee  mirum:  bene  nam  valetis  omnes 

XXXVII,  11  puella  nam  mi,  quae  meo  sinu  fugit 
LXIV,  301  Pelea  nam  tecum  pariter  soror  aspernata  est 
Virgil:  Georgics  IV,  16  omnia  nam  late  vastant  ipsasque  volantis 

Aeneid  I,  444  sic  nam^o  fore  bello  egregiam  et  facilem  victu 
518  quid  veniant:  cunctis  nam  lecti  navibus  ibant 
731  Iuppiter,  hospitibus  nam  te  dare  iura  loquuntur 

III,  379  prohibent  nam  cetera  Pareae  scire  Helenum. 

IV,  421  solam  nam  perfidus  ille  te  colere,  arcanos  etiam 

tibi  credere  sensus 
VI,  667  medium  nam  plurima  turba  hunc  habet 

IX,  803,  aeriam  caelo  nam  Iuppiter  Irim  demisit 

X,  585  dicta  parat  contra,  iaeulum  nam  torquet  in  hostis. 
XII,  206  dextra  sceptrum  nam  forte  gerebat 

Cir.  221  sonitum  nam  fecerat  illi 

458  omnia  nam  potius  quam  te  fecisse  putabo. 
Cat.  (Priapea)  3,  5  huius  nam  domini  colunt  me 
Cat.  4,  10  Clio  naw2i  certe  Candida  non  loquitur. 
Ov.  Her.  XI,  61  fratris  nam22  nupta  futura  es 
Hor.  Epod.  14,  6  deus,  deus  nam  me  vetat 

17,  45  et  tu,  potes  nam,  solve  me  dementia 
Serm.  II,  3,  20  olim  nam  quaerere  amabam 

41  primum  nam  inquiram  quid  sit  furere 
302  insanire  putas?    Ego  nam  videor  mihi  sanus. 
II,  6,  78  si  quis  nam  laudat  Arelli  sollicitas  ignarus  opes 
Epist.  II,  1,  186  aut  ursum  aut  pugilis;  his  nam  plebecula  gaudet. 
Carm.  I,  18,  3  siccis  omnia  nam  dura  deus  proposuit 

IV,  14,  9  milite  nam  tuo 

Drusus  Genaunos,  implacidum  genus 
Propert.  IV,  8,  23  Serica  nam-z  taceo  vulsi  carpenta  nepotis 

In  this  list  it  will  be  noted  that  nam  is  found  in  the  third 
place  in  its  clause  in  Virgil  Aen.  IX,  803  and  XII,  206,  and  in 
Horace  Carm.  I,  18,  3.  This  position  of  nam  is  therefore  by  no 
means  an  impossible  one. 

If  we  restore  nam  then,  the  clause  stands  without  a  verb. 

Would  an  ellipsis  of  est  here  be  in  accordance  with  the  style  of 

Tibullus?     The  following  list24  contains  passages  wherein  there 

is  an  ellipsis  of  esse,  noted  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum : 

I,  1,  75  hie  ego  dux  milesque  bonus. 
I,  3,  5     non  hie  mihi  mater. 


20  sic  nam  F  M2  R  a2  b2:  signam  M1  P2  y1 :  signum  y2  deteriores  pauci. 
2i  Elionam  M :  Clio  tarn  Casaubonus. 

22  Text  doubtful;  above  reading,  Palmer's. 

23  Serica  nam  taceo — Beroaldus  ex  emend.;  serica  nam  tacto — V;  si  riga- 
nam  tacto  ceteri. 

2*  Based  on  the  text  of  Hiller  (1885). 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  181 

I,  3,  7     non  soror. 

I,  3,  9     Delia  non  usquam. 

I,  3,  43  non  fixus  in  agris  ....  lapis. 

I,  4,  23  gratia  magna  Iovi. 

I,  6,  33  quid  tenera  tibi  coniuge  opus? 

I,  7,  9  foil.  Tarbella  Pyrene 

testis  et  Oceani  litora  Santonici, 
testis  Arar  Rhodanusque  celer  magnusque  Garunna, 

Carnutis  et  flavi  caerula  lympha  Liger. 
I,  7,  44  sed  chorus  et  cantus  et  levis  aptus  amor, 

sed  varii  flores  et  frons  redimita  corymbis, 

fusa  sed  ad  teneros  lutea  palla  pedes 
et  Tyriae  vestes  et  dulcis  tibia  cantu 

et  levis  oecultis  conscia  cista  sacris. 
I,  10,  3  turn  caedes  hominum  generi,  turn  proelia  nata. 
I,  10,  9  non  arces,  non  vallus  erat. 
I,  10,  2625  hostiaque  e  plena  rustica  porcus  hara. 

I,  10,  63  quater  ille  beatus 

quo  tenera  irato  flere  puella  potest. 

II,  1,  63  hinc  et  femineus  labor  est,  hinc  pensa  colusque. 
II,  1,  67-8  ipse  interque  greges  interque  armenta  Cupido 

natus  et  indomitas  dicitur  inter  equas. 
II,  1,  79  a  miseri,  quos  hie  graviter  deus  urget! 
II,  1,  79-80  at  ille 

felix,  cui  placidus  leniter  adflat  Amor. 
II,  3,  19  o  quotiens  ausae,  caneret  dum  valle  sub  alta, 

rumpere  mugitu  carmina  docta  boves! 
II,  3,  27  Delos  ubi  nunc,  Phoebe,  tua  est,  ubi  Delphica  Pytho? 
II,  3,  32  fabula  sit  mavult  quam  sine  amore  deus. 
II,  4,  11  nunc  et  amara  dies  et  noctis  amarior  umbra  est. 
II,  4,  45  At  bona  quae  nee  avara  fuit. 
II,  5,  15  te  duce  Romanos  numquam  frustrata  Sibylla. 
II,  5,  107  ars  bona! 

II,  6,  13  iuravi  quotiens  rediturum  ad  limina  numquam! 

III,  19  (IV,  13),  1126  tu  mihi  curarum  requies,  tu  nocte  vel  atra 

lumen,  et  in  solis  tu  mihi  turba  locis. 

Aside  from  the  above  in  the  elegies  of  Tibullus,  the  following 
were  found  in  the  Corpus :  III,  1,  20 ;  III,  1,  26 ;  III,  1,  27 ;  III, 
2,  5;  III,  2,  5-6;  III,  4,  30;  III,  4,  51-2;  III,  4,  83;  III,  4,  94; 
III,  6,  19;  III,  6,  43;  III,  7  (IV,  1),  9-10;  III,  7  (IV,  1),  25; 
III,  7  (IV,  1),  25-6;  III,  7  (IV,  1),  32;  III,  7  (IV,  1),  37;  III,  7 
(IV,  1),  40;  III,  7  (IV,  1),  81;  III,  7  (IV,  1),  87;  III,  7  (IV,  1), 
107  foil.;  Ill,  7  (IV,  1)  180;  III,  7  (IV,  1),  198-9;  III,  9  (IV,  3), 
7;  III,  10  (IV,  4),  23;  III,  15  (IV,  9),  1;  III,  16  (IV,  10),  3-4. 

25  Text  uncertain. 

26  Assuming  that  it  may  be  by  Tibullus. 


182  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

In  the  list  of  ellipses  in  Tibullus,  a  large  number  occur  where 
a  form  of  esse  either  immediately  precedes  or  follows,  e.g.  I,  7,  44 ; 

I,  10,  9 ;  II,  1,  63 ;  II,  3,  27 ;  II,  3,  32 ;  II,  4,  11 ;  II,  4,  45,  and  here 
may  be  classed  (as  following  I,  3,  5)  I,  3,  7  and  I,  3,  9.  A  second 
group  comprises  instances  of  the  omission  of  esse  in  compound 
verb-forms,  e.g.,  I,  10,  3;  II,  1,  67-8;  II,  3,  19;  II,  5,  15;  and 

II,  6,  13.  A  third  group  comprises  those  cases  wherein  a  predi- 
cate noun  or  adjective  occurs,  e.g.  I,  1,  75;  I,  3,  43;  I,  7,  9  (bis)  ; 
I,  10,  26;  I,  10,  63;  II,  1,  79;  II,  1,  80;  II,  5,  107;  and  III,  19 
(IV,  13),  11.  A  fourth  group  comprises  those  instances  where 
the  construction  demands  a  form  of  the  verb  esse  (e.g.  dative  of 
the  possessor)  ;  such  we  find  in  I,  3,  5;  I,  4,  23;  and  I,  6,  33. 
These  four  groups  comprise  all  instances  of  the  ellipsis  of  esse 
in  Tibullus.    Restated  they  are : 

1.  "When  esse  immediately  precedes  or  follows. 

2.  Compound  verb-forms. 

3.  "When  a  predicate  adjective  or  noun  occurs. 

4.  "Where  the  construction  demands  a  form  of  esse. 

As  none  of  these  conditions  holds  true  in  the  verse  under  con- 
sideration, it  seems  to  be  impossible  to  admit  of  an  ellipsis  of  esse 
here. 

The  following  table27  shows  the  position  of  est  in  the  penta- 
meter in  the  elegies  of  Tibullus : 


Elision 

No  elision 

Before  diaeresis 

928 

132 

Begins  second  foot 

429 

233 

After  diaeresis 

0 

634 

Ends  verse 

430 

0 

Ends  first  foot 

131 

0 

Begins  verse 

0 

435 

18 

13 

27  Based  on  Killer's  text. 

28  1,  1,  22;  I,  1,  34;  I,  4,  32;  I,  5,  68;  I,  8,  76;  II,  1,  46;   II,  3,  24: 
II,  5,  36;  III  19  (IV,  13),  2. 

2»  I,  2,  16;  I,  2,  42;  I,  9,  20;  III,  19  (IV,  13),  4. 
so  I,  4,  4;  I,  10,  4;  II,  6,  10;  II,  6  44. 
si  I,  5,  46. 

32  II,  3,  74. 

33  II,  3,  2;  II,  4,  52. 

34  I,  3,  36;  I,  6,  66;  II,  3,  16;  II,  3,  36;  II,  4,  24;  III,  19  (IV,  13),  16. 

35  I,  6,  44;  I,  8,  64;  I,  9,  24;  II,  1,  30. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  183 

The  most  common  position  of  est  in  the  pentameter  of  Tibul- 
lus  where  it  causes  elision,  is  just  before  the  diaeresis;  this,  how- 
ever, would  put  nam  in  the  fourth  place  in  its  clause,  a  position 
in  which  it  is  apparently  not  found  in  classical  Latin.  Next  in 
frequency  are  the  position  at  the  end  of  the  verse,  and  that  at 
the  beginning  of  the  second  foot.  The  latter  being  impossible, 
if  we  retain  the  MS  reading,  I  have  accordingly  placed  est  at  the 
end  of  the  verse.  This  position  moreover  furnishes  an  easy 
explanation  of  its  loss. 

Omissions  of  est  are  not  unparalleled  in  the  MSS  of  the 
Corpus  Tibullianum: 

I,  1,  34,  magno  Fr.  Par.  1. 

magno  est  A  Par.  2. 
Ill,  2,  7  pudor  est  G. 

est  om.  A. 
Ill,  3,  20  invidia  est  Par. 
invida  quae  A. 

Moreover  the  ease  with  which  it  may  be  omitted  at  the  end  of  the 
verse  is  shown  in  Propertius  II,  14,  1 ;  II,  18,  25 ;  and  II,  34,  55. 
The  verse  with  this  wording  suggests,  even  more  than  in  its 
usual  form,  Horace  Epist.  I,  18,  87  dum  tua  navis  in  alto  est, 
frequently  cited  as  parallel.  Moreover  in  Terence  Hauton 
Timorumenos  343-7  we  find  a  resemblance  in  language :  quod 
boni  ....  datur,  fruare  dum  licet :  nam  nescias  ....  eius  sit 
potestas  posthac  an  numquam  tibi. 

I,  6,  7 

Proposed  reading: 

ilia  quidem  per  multa  negat,  sed  credere  durum  est. 

This  reading  is  that  of  all  the  MSS  save  that  they  unite  in 
reading  tarn  for  per.  All  the  early  editors  followed  the  MS  read- 
ing, but  we  see  signs  of  dissatisfaction  with  it  in  Scaliger's  sug- 
gestion of  iam  multa,  Burmann's  insimulata,  and  Santen's 
delicta.  Heyne,  however,  was  the  first  to  object  seriously  to  the 
reading,  and  he  hazarded  both  sua  furta  and  iurata.  The  former 
reading  need  not  detain  us,  but  the  latter  is  decidedly  worthy 
of  consideration.    It  was  suggested  to  Heyne  by  a  careful  read- 


184  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

ing  of  Ovid's  Tristia  II,  447  foil.,  which  verses  repeat  a  consider- 
able portion  of  this  elegy  in  words  which  are  very  like  those  of 
Tibullus.    The  first  two  verses  of  Ovid 's  paraphrase  run : 
credere  iuranti  durum  putat  esse  Tibullus, 
sic  etiam  de  se  quod  neget  ilia  viro. 

Heyne  saw  that  no  word  corresponding  to  Ovid's  iuranti  ap- 
peared in  this  verse  in  Tibullus,  and  inserted  the  only  form 
possible  from  the  standpoint  of  sense  and  meter  iurata,  a  form 
which  is  found,  for  example,  in  Propertius  I,  8,  27.  The  word 
has  met  with  the  approval  of  L.  Mueller,  Baehrens,  H.  Bubendey, 
Belling,  H.  Magnus,36  B.  Maurenbrecher37  and  Postgate.38 
Hiller  proposed  and  read  mihi  cuncta,39  comparing  III,  7  (IV, 
1),  129,  but  cf.  Belling,  Prolegomena  zu  Tibull,  p.  75.  Cartault 
(1909)  reads  quam  multa,  though  earlier40  he  favored  iurata. 

The  only  reading41  thus  far  proposed  that  is  worth  con- 
sideration is  Heyne 's  iurata,  but  to  it  I  have  two  objections. 
1.  Palaeographical.  How  can  the  change  of  iurata  to  tarn  multa 
be  explained  ?  They  have  only  their  last  two  letters  in  common. 
We  must  note,  moreover,  that  all  the  MSS  unite  in  the  reading 
tarn  multa.  2.  The  view  that  some  word  corresponding  exactly 
to  iuranti  must  appear  in  Tibullus  is  not  sound,  for  Ovid  handles 
this  passage  in  the  main  quite  freely.  To  be  sure,  some  verses 
are  strikingly  alike;  compare  e.g.  verses  25-26  of  this  elegy  of 
Tibullus : 

saepe,  velut  gemmas  eius  signumque  probarem, 
per  causam  memini  me  tetigisse  manum. 

with  Ovid's  version  of  the  same  (451-2)  : 

saepe,  velut  gemmam  dominae  signumve  probaret, 
per  causam  meminit  se  tetigisse  manum. 

But  even  here,  where  the  resemblance  is  so  great,  there  are 
variations  that  cannot  be  explained  as  due  to  a  change  of  person 


36  Berliner  philol.  Wochenschrift,  5  (1885),  589. 

37  Philol.,  55  (1896),  450. 

38  Cf.  Classical  Review,  9  (1895),  77. 

so  But  tarn  multa  in  the  Corpus  poetarum  Latinorum  (1893). 

*°  A  propos  du  corpus  Tibullianum. 

4i  F.  Wilhelm  (J.  P.  P.,  151  [1895],  114)  and  G.  Friedrich  (Wissen- 
schaftliche  Beilage  sum  Jahresbericht  des  evang.  Gymnasiums  in  Schweid- 
nitz,  Ostern,  1898)  defend  tarn  multa. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  185 

or  the  exigencies  of  meter.  "Why,  for  example,  did  Ovid  write 

-ve  instead  of  -que?    "Why  did  he  not  retain  the  plural  gemmasf 

And  if  we  pass  from  this  to  the  passages  where  the  correspondence 

is  not  so  great,  we  can  easily  see  the  freedom  with  which  Ovid 

has  handled  his  original.     Thus  Tibullus  reads  in  verses  19-20 : 

neu  te  decipiat  nutu,  digitoque  liquorem 

ne  trahat  et  mensae  ducat  in  orbe  notas. 

but  Ovid  (in  453-4)  as  follows: 

utque  refert,  digitis  saepe  est  nutuque  locutus, 
et  tacitam  mensae  duxit  in  orbe  notam. 

It  should  be  noted  that  neu  te  decipiat  has  no  expression  corre- 
sponding to  it  in  Ovid's  lines,  that  nutu  is  joined  with  the 
following  clause,  and  that  digito  ....  liquorem  ....  trahat 
appears  as  digitis  .  ...  est  ...  .  locutus;  moreover  words  are 
added,  some  to  be  sure  to  keep  the  original  speaker  in  mind,  as 
utque  refert,  but  others  with  no  such  purpose,  as  saepe  and 
tacitam. 

The  freedom  of  Ovid's  treatment  being  thus  apparent,  we 
have  no  right  to  demand  that  some  form  of  iurare  appear  in 
Tibullus ;  if  we  had,  should  we  not  similarly  try  to  insert  negat, 
or  some  form  thereof,  in  the  corresponding  verse  of  Ovid?  All 
we  can  say  is  that  the  one  word,  iuranti,  in  Ovid  corresponds 
roughly  to  the  clause  ilia  quidem  ....  multa  negat  in  Tibullus ; 
in  other  words,  though  iurare  itself  may  not  appear  in  Tibullus, 
the  idea  of  an  oath  should  naturally  suggest  itself. 

The  reading  per  multa,  which  is  now  proposed,  was  suggested 
by  Tibullus  I,  2,  38 : 

perque  deos  omnes  se  meminisse  neget. 
In  other  words,  Tibullus  uses  the  expression  per  aliquem  negare, 
from  which  of  course  it  is  but  a  step  to  per  aliquid  negare.  In 
his  comment  on  the  above  verse  of  Tibullus,  Heyne  says :  "  h.  1. 
iuret  per  deos  omnes  se  non  meminisse,"  that  is  to  say,  negare 
per  is  a  synonym  of  iurare  per  ....  non.i2 

The  Corpus  Tibullianum  is  exceedingly  fond  of  the  use  of 
per  in  asseverations : 


42  Cf.  Martial  XI,  94,  7:  "Ecce  negas  iurasque  mihi  per  templa  Tonan- 
tis. ' ' 


186  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

I,  5,  7-8  parce  tamen,  per  te  furtivi  foedera  lecti, 

per  Venerem  quaeso  compositumque  caput. 

I,  4,  25-6  perque  suas  impune  sinit  Dictyima  sagittas 

adfirmes,  crines  perque  Minerva  suos. 

II,  6,  29  parce,  per  immatura  tuae  preeor  ossa  sororis. 

So  also  III,  1,  15-16,  III,  6,  47-8,  and  III,  11  (IV,  5),  7-8.    The 

use  therefore  of  per  in  asseverations  in  general  and  with  negare 

in  particular  is  paralleled  in  Tibullus. 

What  then  would  per  multa  negare  mean?     Consider  such  a 

plea  as  that  in  Virgil  Aen.  IV,  314-8 : 

per  ego  has  lacrimas  dextramque  tuam  te 
(quando  aliud  mihi  iam  miserae  nihil  ipsa  reliqui), 
per  conubia  nostra,  per  inceptos  hymenaeos, 
si  bene  quid  de  te  merui,  fuit  aut  tibi  quicquam 
dulce  meum,  miserere  domus  labentis. 

Or  turn  to  that  in  Silius  Italicus  V,  82  foil. : 
Iliacas  per  te  flammas  Tarpeiaque  saxa, 
per  patrios,  consul,  muros,  suspensaque  nostrae 
eventu  pugnae  natorum  pignora,  cedas 
oramus  superis. 

If  we  desired  to  describe  these  appeals  briefly,  should  we  not 
say  that  in  each  case  the  speaker  ' '  per  multa  oravit ' '  ?  We  have 
moreover  the  oath  in  the  Aeneid  XII,  197  foil. : 

haec  eadem,  Aenea,  terram,  mare,  sidera,  iuro 
Latonaeque  genus  duplex  Ianumque  bifrontem, 
vimque  deum  infernam  et  duri  sacraria  Ditis. 

There  is  also  that  in  Juvenal  XIII,  78  foil. : 

per  Solis  radios  Tarpeiaque  fulmina  iurat 
et  Martis  frameam  et  Cirrhaei  spicula  vatis, 
per  calamos  venatricis  pharetramque  puellae 
perque  tuum,  pater  Aegaei  Neptune,  tridentem; 
addit  et  Herculeos  arcus  hastamque  Minervae 
quidquid  habent  telorum  armamentaria  caeli. 

These  oaths  could  readily  be  summarized  by  saying  "per  multa 
iuravit." 

It  can  hardly  be  objected  that  there  are  absolutely  no  examples 
in  Latin  of  asseverations  where  per  is  followed  by  the  neuter 
of  an  adjective  or  pronoun  used  substantively,  for  we  find  in 
Servius  on  Aen.  X,  45:  "Sallustius  in  primo  postremo  ipsos 
colonos  per  miserias  et  incerta  humani  generis  orare."  Per 
incerta  is  parallel  to  per  multa.     Somewhat  analagous  are  also 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  187 

Stat.  Theb.  XI,  368-9  per  si  quid  in  ilia  dulce  domo  and  Quint. 
Declam.  TV,  22  per  ego,  si  fas  est,  quicquid  feci,  ....    We  find 
also  in  Auct.  ad  Herennium  IV,  52 : 
'parce, '  inquit,  'et  per  quae  tibi  dulcissima  sunt  in  vita,  miserere  nostri.  '« 

The  change  palaeographically  is  not  a  great  one.  Multa  is 
retained ;  per,  through  the  influence  of  the  following  word,  might 
readily  have  converted  r  into  m.  Both  words  are  of  exactly  the 
same  length ;  and  the  interchange  of  p  and  t  appears  also  e.g.  in 
Tibullus  I,  10,  36  where  for  puppis  A  (pupis  and  pauppis,  Par.) 
turpis,  the  reading  of  £,  is  accepted  by  scholars. 

I,  9,  25 
Proposed  reading: 

ipse  deus  tacito  permisit  vina  ministro, 
ederet  ut  multo  libera  verba  mero. 

MSS  leve  AV  (lene  Vm2),  Iqne  G. 
lena,  laeva,  leva,  seva,  saeva  £. 

Readings : 

lingua Eigler,  followed  by  L.  Mueller,*-*  Haupt-Vahlen,  Belling 

(Tibullus),  and  F.  Wilhelm.45 

verba and  in  verse  26  lingua  for  verba — Francken.4** 

nonne suggested  by  Lachmann. 

saepe proposed  by  Muretus:  followed  by  Hiller."4?     .  - 

lene Aldus,  Sessa,  Muretus,  Grasser,  Maittaire,  Lachmann,  Gruppe, 

Baehrens. 

vela Scaliger,  followed  by  Broukhusius  and  Volpi. 

vela  magister Guyet. 

laeva Voss. 

frena Burmann  II  and  Huschke. 

lora Santen. 

lena Statius,   Passerat,    Heyne,   Huschke,    Golbery,   Dissen,   and 

Kemper. 

laeve Nemethy. 

tormentum  admovit  lene  ministro** Cartault  (1909). 


43  So  Baiter  and  Kayser:  Orelli  reads  "per  ea  quae,  etc." 

44  L.  Mueller  ascribes  this  reading  to  exc.  Par. 
«  N.  Jahrb.  f.  Phil.  u.  Paed.,  151  (1895),  769. 
^Mnemos.  n.s.,  6  (1878),  187. 

4?  But  in  the  Corpus  poetarum  Latinorum  (1893),  leve. 
«F.  Jacoby,  Berliner  philol.  Wochenschrift,  29   (1909),  1467,  calls  it 
die  plumpe  Heriibernahme  aus  Horat.  c.  Ill,  21,  13." 


188  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

Postgate  impales  lene  as  corrupt,  suggesting  that  lenae  was 
perhaps  written  as  an  explanation  of  ministro;  but  he  proposes 
as  a  possible  reading  vina.  Prior  to  seeing  Postgate 's  note,  this 
.reading  had  appeared  to  me  the  correct  one,  and  the  fact  that 
it  has  suggested  itself  to  so  eminent  a  scholar  has  of  course 
intensified  my  belief  in  the  soundness  of  vina.49 

If  we  assume  that  lene,  whether  as  adjective  or  adverb,  is 
impossible  here,  we  have  in  vim  a  word  that  fits  the  thought 
admirably.  The  distich  translated  would  read:  "The  god  him- 
self granted  wine  to  the  silent  servant,  to  cause  him  to  utter  free- 
spoken  words  through  the  influence  of  abundant  liquor."  The 
expression  ipse  deus  ....  permisit  vina  is  paralleled  by  Ov. 
Fast.  I,  403  vina  dabat  Liber. 

That  both  vinum  and  merum  are  found  in  the  same  distich  is 
not  in  any  wise  abnormal  in  Tibullus : 

I,  2,  1  Adde  merum  vinoque  novos  compesce  dolores. 
I,  5,  37-8  saepe  ego  temptavi  curas  depellere  vino: 

at  dolor  in  lacrimas  verterat  omne  merum. 

So  also  Prop.  II,  33,  31-32 : 

tuque,  o  Eurytion,  vino,  centaure,  peristi, 
nee  non  Ismario  tu,  Polypheme,  mero. 

Both  of  the  other  instances  of  permittere  in  the  Corpus 
Tibullianum50  show  the  verb  with  an  object,  though  of  course  the 
expressions"  are  not  parallel.  "While  there  are  no  instances  in 
Tibullus  of  permittere  with  an  object  and  also  a  clause  of  pur- 
pose, yet  he  shows  several  instances  of  dare  with  both : 
I,  8,  29-30  det  munera  canus  amator, 

ut  foveat  molli  frigida  membra  sinu. 
I,  6,  13  tunc  sucos  herbasque  dedi,  quis  livor  abiret. 

For  a  concrete  noun  as  object  of  permittere,  may  be  compared 
Lucan  VII,  123-4 : 

Sic  fatur  et  arma 
permittit  populis. 

Palaeographically  the  change  is  not  difficult,  even  if  we  feel 
by  no  means  certain  of  Postgate 's  theory  that  lenae  was  a  gloss 
on  ministro.    Vina  and  leve  (reading  of  AV)  are  words  of  exactly 


40  For  Postgate 's  discussion,  see  Classical  Beview,  19  (1905),  213-4,  and 
23,  186-7. 

so  HI,  7  (IV,  1),  92,  and  III,  16  (IV,  10),  1-2. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  189 

the  same  length.  Confusion  of  initial  I  and  v  is  also  found  in 
the  MSS  of  Lucr.'  Ill,  95  (locaturn — Marullus;  vocatum — OQ) 
and  Lucr.  V,  12  (locavit — L;  vocavit — OQ).  For  the  ease  with 
which  e  and  i  are  interchanged,  compare : 

I,  2,  65  posset — G;  possit — A. 

I,  2,  79  magni — A;  magnae — others. 

I,  4,  9  fuge  te — others;  fugite — Fr. 

T,  4,  40  vincit — f;  vincet — AVG. 

The  v  and  n  are  easily  interchanged ;  note  the  various  MS  read- 
ings of  this  very  word,  as  well  as  I,  8,  2  lenia  V,  levia  A,  and 
I,  8,  57  lenis  G,  levis  A.  The  final  a  for  e  is  found  in  the  reading 
of  several  of  the  inferior  MSS.  In  I,  1,  5  the  same  error  is  found, 
vita,  P.  Fr.,  apearing  as  vite  in  A. 

Moreover  the  other  readings  proposed  are  not  satisfactory. 
Lena  and  lingua  introduce  a  very  peculiar  word-order :  we  should 
then  have  the  subject  of  the  subordinate  clause  inserted  in  the 
main  clause.  There  are,  it  is  true,  examples  throughout  the 
Corpus  Tibullianum  of  the  deferring  of  the  conjunction51  of  the 
subordinate  clause.52  But  the  only  instances  I  have  noted 
wherein  one  or  more  words  belonging  to  the  subordinate  clause 
are  placed  before  a  word  belonging  to  the  main  clause,  are  the 
following  :53 

(1)  Where  the  main  clause  consists  of  but  one  word  (a  verb) 
and  no  conjunction54  is  employed : 

I,  2,  12  capiti  sint  precor  ilia  meo. 

67  ille  licet  Cilicum  victas  agat  ante  catervas. 

3,  83  at  tu  casta  precor  maneas. 

4,  53-4  rapias  turn  cara  licebit  oscula. 
6,  56  sit  precor  ilia  levis. 

9,  40  sit  precor  exemplo  sit  levis  ilia  tuo. 
9,  49  ilia  velim  rapida  Vulcanus  carmina  flamma  etc. 
Ill,  6,  26  quid  valeat  laesi  sentiat  ira  dei. 


si  See  Emiliiis  Schuenke,  Be  traiectione  coniunctionum  et  pronominis 
relativi  apud  poetas  Latinos,  Kiliae,  1906.  It  does  not,  however,  deal 
with  books  III  and  IV. 

52  Goldbery  defends  the  word-order  (reading  lena)  by  Hor.  Serm.  I,  1,  88, 
which  is  not  at  all  conclusive:  (1)  because  it  is  only  an  instance  of  the 
trajection  of  the  relative,  and  (2)  were  it  an  even  more  complicated  order, 
such  order  in  Horace  would  not  justify  its  introduction  into  the  text  of 
Tibullus. 

53  Of  course  sentences  are  not  included  wherein  the  whole  subordinate 
clause  precedes  the  main  clause. 

54  We  have,  however,  an  interrogative  pronoun  in  the  verse  from 
Lygdamus. 


190  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

This  use  is  quite  characteristic  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum  and 
might  be  a  development  of  the  purely  parenthetical  use,  as  in 

II,  3,  74  mos  precor  ille  redi. 

III,  12  (IV,  6),  8  sed  iuveni  quaeso  mutua  vincla  para. 

(2)   This  isolated  case : 

,  I,  4,  25-6  perque  suas  impune  si  nit  Dictynna  sagittas 

adfirmes,  crines  perque  Minerva  suos. 

Leaving  this  passage  for  the  present,  we  find  besides  the  follow- 
ing instances  of  peculiar  word-order : 

II,  3,  14  quidquid  erat  medicae  vicerat  artis  amor. 

III,  16  (IV,  10),  5-6  solliciti  sunt  pro  nobis,  quibus  ilia  doloris 

ne  cedam  ignoto  maxima  causa  toro. 

In  these  last  two  instances,  however,  instead  of  a  thrusting  for- 
ward of  a  portion  of  the  subordinate  clause  into  the  main  clause, 
we  have  the  reverse  condition,  i.e.  where  a  word  of  the  modify- 
ing clause  (which  precedes  the  clause  on  which  it  depends)  is 
delayed  and  placed  in  the  main  clause;  but  in  both  instances  of 
the  delayed  word,  a  modifying  adjective  (medicae,  II,  3,  14,  and 
ignoto,  III,  16  [IV,  10],  6)  causes  the  mind  to  remain  in  suspense, 
waiting  for  the  noun  each  is  to  modify  (artis,  II,  3,  14,  and  toro, 
111,16  [IV,  10],  6). 

I,  4,  25-6,  to  recur  to  that  passage,  resembles  class  1,  cited 
above,  in  that  the  subordinate  clause  has  no  conjunction;  more- 
over, the  only  portion  of  the  subordinate  clause  that  has  thrust 
itself  forward  is  per  suas :  the  mind,  as  in  the  two  instances  just 
discussed,  waits  for  the  noun  which  suas  is  to  modify,  which 
appears  in  sagittas,  the  first  word  of  the  subordinate  clause. 

Nowhere,  therefore,  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum  do  we  find 
a  single  word  taken  from  out  of  the  subordinate  clause  (and  in 
fact  the  subject  of  that  clause),  and  embedded  in  the  main  clause 
— a  condition  which  would  be  demanded  by  reading  lena  or 
lingua. 

Nonne  never  appears  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum;  -ne  is 
always  appended  to  the  first  word  in  the  sentence  and  verse,  save 
in  III,  11  (IV,  5),  20,  where  it  appears  twice  in  an  indirect  ques- 
tion, but  in  its  usual  position  in  the  clause. 

The  chief  difficulty  in  the  reading  saepe  (and  it  seems  to  me 
insuperable)    is  the  palaeographical  one.     But  it  may  also  be 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  191 

noted  that  its  position  is  unusual.  The  word  is  found  in  the 
Corpus  Tibullianum55  nineteen  times,56  of  which  eighteen  are  in 
books  I  and  II,  and  one  in  III,  6,  4 ;  of  these  uses,  eighteen  precede 
the  verb  and  only  one  follows  it,  this  being  I,  6,  21  where  we 
have  the  expression  quam  saepe.  (Note  that  the  deferred  quam 
cito  in  I,  4,  28  also  follows  its  verb.)  Again,  of  these  nineteen 
uses,  fourteen  appear  as  the  first  word  in  the  verse  and  word- 
group,  two  as  the  second  word  in  the  verse  and  sentence  (I,  9,  61 
and  II,  5,  35)  and  only  three  later  in  the  sentence  and  verse,  of 
which  two  involve  the  expression  quam  saepe  (I,  6,  21  and 
I,  8,  53)  and  the  third  is  at  the  earliest  possible  position  in  its 
clause'  (II,  3,  59).  Consequently  the  use  of  saepe  in  Tibullus 
is  decidedly  against  its  employment  here  in  this  position  in  the 
sentence  and  verse,  even  aside  from  the  palaeographical  diffi- 
culties and  Wilhelm's  well-taken  criticism57  that  it  is  superfluous 
when  employed  with  permisit,  which  is  here  used,  like  iussit,  as 
a  gnomic  aorist. 

Francken's  insertion  of  verba  here  and  the  substitution  of 
lingua  for  verba  in  the  following  verse  appear  changes  altogether 
too  violent  to  be  probable. 

The  fact  therefore  that  the  readings  thus  far  proposed  are  so 
unsatisfactory,  should  make  us  welcome  Postgate's  suggestion 
of  vina  all  the  more. 

I,  10,  37 
Proposed  reading: 

illic  {parcel)  ustisque  genis  ustoque  capillo 
errat  ad  obscuros  pallida  turba  lacus. 

For  the  words  suggested  the  reading  of  AVG  is  percussisque ; 
P,  perscissisque ;  and  £,  perculsisque.  The  bulk  of  the  editions 
read  as  A  or  P,  percussisque  appearing,  for  example,  in  Muretus, 
Huschke,  Maittaire,  Lachmann,  Dissen,  Baehrens,  and  Postgate. 
Perscissisque  is  the  reading  of  Guyet,  Scaliger  (editions  of  1600 
and  1607),  Volz,  Francken,58  L.  Mueller,  Hiller,  Ramsay,  and 


ss  III,  14  (IV,  8),  6  is  too  unsettled  to  cite  in  this  list. 

56  See  the  Index  Verborum  in  Hiller 's  edition. 

57  N.  Jahr.  f.  Phil.  u.  Pacd.,  151  (1895),  769. 
ssphilol,  28  (1869),  573. 


192  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

Schulze.  In  the  editions  before  1600,  Scaliger  read  percisisque. 
Heinsius'  conjecture  of  exesisque  was  adopted  by  Broukhusius, 
Heyne,  and  Becker.  Voss,  Bach,  and  Bauer  read  perculsisque. 
Livineius  and  Dousa  P.  suggested  pertusisque,  which  Postgate 
introduced  into  his  Selections.  Lachmann's  conjecture,  rescissis- 
que,59  was  approved  and  accepted  by  Gruppe,  Haupt-Vahlen,60 
and  Jacoby.  Goerenz  read  peresisque,  which  is  unmetrical. 
Moreover  Eabus  proposed  percoctisque ;  Belling,  praescissisque; 
B.  Fabricius,  exustisque,  which  was  also  read  by  G.  Nemethy,61 
who  changed  in  addition  ustoque  to  tostoque.  Nemethy  had 
previously  (1905)  proposed  perfossisque. 

Many  scholars  accept  the  readings  named  with  reluctance. 
Thus  Ramsay  would  prefer  exesisque,  save  that  "it  involves  a 
great  change  in  the  text."  Wratislaw  and  Sutton  declare  per- 
cussisque  corrupt,  but  add  that  "no  satisfactory  emendation  has 
been  proposed."  Dissen  also  calls  it  "corrupta  lectio"  and  feels 
that  such  a  word  as  exesisque  gives  the  sense  required :  ' '  consilio 
loci  accommodatissima,  pr.  excavatis,  absumta  carne  per  ignem 
rogi." 

To  take  percussis  as  "struck  with  fear"  is  bold;  moreover  the 
linking  of  such  a  thought  with  usto  capillo  is  exceedingly  un- 
natural; to  give  it  the  meaning  "driven  in,  i.e.  hollow,  sunken" 
seems  entirely  unwarranted.  As  to  perscissis,  it  would  be  appro- 
priate if  used  of  the  mourners,  not  of  the  dead  themselves.  In 
the  same  way  percussis  with  its  literal  meaning  would  fit  the 
mourners  but  not  the  dead.  Voss'  interpretation  of  perculsis, 
"mit  Wangen  voll  Todesangst,  d.i.  blass  und  verzerrt, "  is 
ludicrous. 

Exactly  the  thought  that  such  scholars  as  Dissen  suggest, 
"excavatis,  absumta  carne  per  ignem  rogi,"  would  be  obtained 
by  reading  ustis.  "Parce!"  is  the  expression  falling  from  the 
poet 's  lips  as  the  grewsome  picture  presents  itself  to  his  mind. 
"There  (ah,  spare  me!)  with  cheeks  burned  away  and  hair 
burned  away,  the  wan  throng  wanders  by  the  dark  pools. ' ' 


so  Cf.  Eleinere  Schriften,  II  (1876),  147. 

«o  In  the  edition  of  1904  percussisque  appears. 

«i  Cf.  Ehein.  Museum,  64  (1909),  471. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  193 

No  instance  of  ustae  genae  has  come  to  my  notice,  but  a  rather 
interesting  parallel  is  found  in  Propertius  III,  12,  26 : 

exustaeque  tuae  mox,  Polypheme,  genaefi* 
One  may  cite  Propertius  IV,  1,  44  for  some  points  of  similarity : 

et  verita  est  umeros  urere  flamma  pios. 

Moreover,  the  burning  of  the  funeral-pyre  is  also  referred  to  in 

Propertius  III,  15,  46  : 

,  te  solam  et  lignis  funeris  ustus  amem. 

Propertius  IV,  7,  7-9   (of  Cynthia's  ghost)   is  sometimes  cited 

with  reference  to  this  passage : 

eosdem  habuit  secum  quibus  est  elata  capillis, 
eosdem  oculos  lateri  vestis  adusta  fuit, 
et  solitum  digito  beryllon  adederat  ignis. 

It  must  be  noted,  however,  that  the  very  first  verse  of  this  quota- 
tion contradicts  our  usto  capillo. 

In  Tibullus '  elegy  the  horrors  of  death  are  portrayed,  and  the 
picture  that  he  is  seeking  to  present  is  of  atra  mors.  Therefore 
he  represents  the  pallida  turba  of  ghosts  wandering  by  the 
obscuros  lacus,  mere  skeletons  with  hair  and  flesh  burned  from 
them.  It  is  not  the  dead  individual  whose  loved  image  is  being 
recalled  as  it  was  in  the  prime  of  life  or  as  last  seen  on  earth, 
but  the  throng  of  the  dead,  each  as  the  flames  of  the  funeral- 
pyre  have  left  him.  And  as  this  horrible  picture  comes  before 
his  mind,  Tibullus  shrinks  back  and  pleads  ' '  parce  ! ' '  Just  so 
he  pleads  for  escape  from  death  in  I,  3,  51,  parce,  pater.  The 
picture  here  being  more  grewsome,  the  "parce!"  falls  from  his 
lips  even  before  he  depicts  the  scene. 

The  words  parce!  and  parcite!  are  frequently  found  in  Tibul- 
lus :  in  books  I  and  II63  we  find  thirteen  instances  as  compared 
with  five  in  all  of  Propertius.6*  As  an  appeal  for  protection  we 
find  at  milii  parce,  Venus  (I,  2,  97).  In  I,  3,  51  we  have  just 
seen  that  it  is  used  with  reference  to  death;  there  mihi  is  also 
omitted  as  here.  The  dative  is  likewise  omitted  in  I,  4,  83 ;  I,  5,  7 ; 
I,  9,  5 ;  and  II,  6,  29.    Of  these  I,  5,  7  most  nearly  resembles  the 


62  Here  genae  =  "  die  Augenhohlung  oder  das  Auge"  (Eothstein). 

63  Cf.  Index  Verborum  in  Hiller's  edition. 

64  Cf.  Phillimore,  Index  Verborum  Propertianus. 


194  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

proposed  reading,  because  not  only  is  the  dative  omitted,  but  no 
vocative  is  expressed : 

paree  tamen,  per  te  furtivi  foedera  lecti 

per  venerem  quaeso  compositumque  caput. 

In  II,  6,  29  also,  both  vocative  and  dative  are  omitted  with  parce, 

but  as  the  vocative,  dura  puella,  appeared  in  the  preceding  verse, 

its  omission  is  less  striking. 

One  does  not  have  to  search  far  in  Tibullus  for  examples  of 

such  repetitions  as  ustis — usto.     Of  this  very  verb,  urere,  there 

are  three  examples  in  Tibullus : 

II,  4,  5-6  et  seu  quid  merui  seu  quid  peccavimus,  urit. 

uror,  io,  remove,  saeva  puella,  faces. 
II,  2,  3  urantur  pia  tura  focis,  urantur  odores. 
I,  9,  15  uretur  facies,  urentur  sole  capilli. 

Of  these  three  examples,  the  first  and  last  are  interesting  as  not 
employing  urere  in  precisely  the  same  form  in  the  two  uses ;  this 
is  also  the  case  in  the  proposed  reading. 

No  example  of  elided  parce  appears  in  the  Corpus  Tibul- 
lianum,  but  we  find  parce  oculis  in  Propertius  IV,  9,  53  and 
similar  elisions  in  Juvenal  VIII,  117  and  Seneca  Her.  Get.  1447. 
Sentences  of  command  limited  to  the  imperative  appear  in  II,  1, 
87  (ludite),  II,  3,  79  (ducite),  II,  5,  121  (adnue).  Parenthetical 
expressions  we  find  for  example  in  I,  3,  26  (an  elided  memini) 
and  I,  8,  69  (moneo).  Moreover  the  use  of  such  an  expression  to 
impart  vividness  appears  in  II,  2,  10 : 

en  age  (quid  cessas?  adnuit  ille)  roga. 

The  change  from  (parce!)  ustisque  to  percussisque  is  very 
easily  explained  palaeographically.  The  moment  the  scribe 
failed  to  see  that  he  had  two  words,  and  regarded  them  as  one,65 
it  was  easy  for  the  first  syllable  of  parce  to  be  altered  to  per. 
The  interchange  moreover  of  a  and  e  is  frequent  in  the  MSS.  To 
change  t  of  ustisque  to  another  s  was  natural,  owing  to  the 
presence  of  this  letter  twice  in  the  word,  and  the  fact  that  the 
word  percussis  is  a  common  one. 

Tibullus  then  represents  a  ghastly  throng  as  wandering  by 


65  For  examples  of  similar  errors  in  incorrect  division  into  words,  see 
page  216. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  195 

the  pools  of  the  lower  world ;  in  other  words,  his  picture  of  the 

dead  is  closely  akin  to  that  in  Ovid  Ibis  143-4 : 

turn  quoque  factorum  veniam  memor  umbra  tuorum, 
insequar  et  vultus  ossea  forma  tuos. 

II,  2,  17-22 
Proposed  reading : 

vota  cadunt :  'utinam  strepitantibus  advolet  alis 

flavaque  coniugio  vincula  portet  Amor, 
vincula,  quae  maneant  semper,  dum  tarda  senectus 

inducat  rugas  inficiatque  comas.' 
hie  veniat  (Natalis,  ades)  prolemque  ministret, 
ludat  et  ante  tuos  turba  novella  pedes. 

These  verses  read  in  A  exactly  as  above  (disregarding 
vinculaque  manent)  save  that  ades  appears  as  avis.  In  but  few 
of  the  editions  is  the  MS  reading  retained,  and,  in  addition  to 
difficulties  of  reading,  those  of  interpretation  also  arise  in  con- 
sidering these  verses. 

Utinam  is  read  by  most  editors,  but  viden  ut,  the  conjecture 
of  Guyet  and  Heinsius  (suggested  by  II,  1,  25)  appears  in  the 
editions  of  Broukhusius,  Volpi,  Heyne,  Voss,  Huschke,  Golbery, 
L.  Mueller,  and  Postgate.66  Baehrens  proposed  ut  iam  and 
altered  to  advolat  and  portat;  these  readings  Woltjer  and 
Jurenka  followed. 

The  inferior  reading,  trepidantibus,  which  Broukhusius  in- 
troduced into  his  text,  is  now  universally  rejected  and  need  not 
detain  us. 

On  the  score  of  a  reading  cadant  £,  Haupt  proposed  vota 
cadant  utinam!  str.,  etc.  Postgate  also  independently  made  this 
suggestion,67  but  later68  rejected  it  and  proposed  vota  cadant 
tibi,  nam. 

Verse  21  is  the  most  altered  of  all  the  verses.  The  MS  read- 
ing hie  (hec  G)  veniat  natalis  avis  prolemque  ministret,  is  fol- 


66  Selections.  In  his  complete  edition,  Postgate  reads  utinam,  comment- 
ing however  "quod  vix  sanum. "  Dissen,  while  not  placing  viden  ut  in 
the  text,  approves  of  it  as  "praeclara  coniectura. " 

67  Journal  of  Philology,  25  (1897),  51. 
C8  Journal  of  Philology,  26,  184  foil. 


196  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

lowed  by  Goldbery  and  Haupt-Vahlen,69  and,  with  a  change  to 
prolesque,  by  Rothstein.70  The  MS  reading  with  the  capitaliza- 
tion of  Nat  alts,  is  followed  by  Lachmann7]  and  Gruppe.  Drenck- 
hahn  would  punctuate  hie  veniat  natalis,  avis  prolemque  minis- 
tret.  The  earlier  scholars,  e.g.  Muretus  and  Scaliger,  read  hue 
veniat  natalis  avis,  prolemque  ministret.  Heinsius  proposed 
hue  veniat  natalis,  avis  prolemque  ministret,  and  hac  veniat 
natalis  avi  prolemque  ministret,  and  also  the  latter  with  venias 
and  ministres.  The  last  of  these  (with  a  capitalization  of 
Natalis)  was  accepted  by  Broukhusius,  Heyne,72  Voss,  the  Del- 
phin  Classics,  and  Becker.  This  conjecture,  hac  ....  avi,  but 
with  the  verbs  retained  in  the  third  person,  is  approved  by 
Huschke,  Dissen,  Hiller,  L.  Mueller,  Jacoby,73  and  Jurenka. 
Bauer  reads  hue  venias,  Natalis  avis,  prolemque  ministres. 
Baehrens  (in  Tib.  Bl.,  p.  89)  suggests  hie  veniat  Natalis  avis 
(avof)  prolesque  ministret  Ludat  ut  ante,  etc.;  in  his  edition, 
however,  we  find  haec  veniat  genialis  avis;  prolesque  ministret, 
in  which  Woltjer  follows  him.  Graef  thinks  the  dfstich  spurious 
or  that  the  genuine  words  of  the  hexameter  (perhaps  interea, 
Natalis,  ave  prolemque  ministra)  have  been  very  seriously  cor- 
rupted. Eveniat  was  Housman's  suggestion  for  the  beginning 
of  the  verse;  Postgate's  haec  {hec  G)  valeat  (which  he  incor- 
porated in  his  Selections)7*  and  haec  veniat,  Natalis,  avis,  etc., 
which  appears  in  his  complete  edition.  Belling  read  sic75  veniat 
natalis  avis,  prolesque  ministret. 

In  the  final  verse,  et  found  in  practically  all  of  the  editions 
is  converted  into  ut  (£)  by  Voss,  Huschke,  Baehrens,  and 
Woltjer ;  and  Dissen  also  approves  of  it. 


«9  H.  Magnus,  Berliner  philol.  Wochenschrift,  13   (1893),  1550  declares 
the  MS  reading  "gewiss  nicht  unecht. " 
to  Cf.  Bursian  Jahr.,  51,  336  foil. 
7i  Cf.  Eleinere  Schriften,  II  (1876),  147. 

72  Heyne  was,  however,  dissatisfied  with  the  reading  and  proposed: 
"Sic  venias,  Natalis,  avis"  or  "Hie  veniat  natalis  avis,  prolemque  minis- 
tret" (the  MS  reading). 

73  Jacoby:  "1st  avis  nicht  vielleicht  nur  durch  Dittographie  von  -alis 
entstanden  und  hat  ein  anderes  Wort  verdriingt?" 

74  Cf.  Journal  of  Philology,  26  (1898-9),  184  foil.  In  the  Classical  Be- 
view,  9  (1895),  74-8,  he  favored  prolesque  ministret  .  .  .  .  ut. 

70  E.  Ehwald,  Deutsche  Litteraturzeitung,  16  Jahrg.  (1895),  937-40,  had 
proposed:  "sic  veniat  natalis  avis."    See  also  Philol.,  54  (1895),  459. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  197 

"Utinam,"  according  to  Postgate,  "is  clearly  wrong,  as  the 
appearance  of  Love  is  the  sign  that  the  prayer  is  granted ' ' ;  and 
similarly  Broukhusius  declares:  "post  vota  rata,  quid  hie  faciat 
utinam,  optandi  particula,  vix  bene  perspici  potest."  It  is  such 
objections  that  have  caused  suspicion  to  be  cast  on,  or  changes  to 
be  made  in  utinam. 

Let  us  rather,  however,  take  the  text  as  it  stands,  and  con- 
sider the  meaning  of  the  individual  words  from  their  context. 
Vota  would  of  course  be  the  prayers  of  Cornutus,  those  which 
he  was  urged  to  make  in  verse  10  and  the  contents  of  which  the 
poet  foretells  (note  the  tense  of  optabis)  in  verses  11  to  16  in- 
clusive. Passing  over  cadunt  for  the  time  being,  we  come  to 
utinam.  Here  we  evidently  have  the  vota  themselves.76  That  is, 
the  long-delayed  prayers  of  Cornutus  begin  with  the  word 
utinam  and  continue  to  the  end  of  verse  20.  As  we  are  waiting 
for  the  prayers,  vota  at  once  brings  them  sharply  before  the 
mind  and  utinam  introduces  them.  What  now  of  cadunt f  It 
evidently  cannot  mean  "frustranea  et  irrita  sunt,"7-7  for  this 
would  make  their  subsequent  statement  entirely  out  of  place, 
and  would  moreover  be  contradictory  to  verses  9-10  : 

adnuat  et,  Cornute,  tibi  quodcumque  rogabis. 
en  age  (quid  cessas?  adnuit  ille)  roga. 

But,  with  very  few  exceptions,  cadunt  is  interpreted  rata  sunt, 
eveniunt,  and  yet,  as  has  been  stated,  for  the  prayers  to  follow 
immediately  on  a  statement  that  they  "are  realized,"  is  hardly 
natural.  The  difficulty,  it  appears  to  me,  is  to  be  met  by  taking 
a  different  interpretation  of  cadunt,  rather  than  by  altering 
utinam.  Does  cadere  ever  mean  precisely  ratum  esse?  Becker 
(Elegeia  Romana)  says:  "Scire  tamen  velim  quo  alio  loco 
cadere  i.e.  accidere  positum  sit  pro  evenire,  ratum  esse  (in 
Erfiillung  gehen)."  Is  it  not  rather  true  that  cadere  when 
applied  to  such  words  as  verbum,  vox,  votum,  merely  means  "fall 


76  Cf .  Hor.  Serm.  II,  6,  59-62 : 

perditur  haec  inter  misero  lux  non  sine  votis: 
o  rus,  quando  ego  te  adspiciam?   quandoque  licebit 
nunc  veterum  libris,  nunc  somno  et  inertibus  horis, 
ducere  sollicitae  iucunda  oblivia  vitae? 
Cf.  also  Hor.  Serm.  II,  6,  1. 

77  Delphin  Classics. 


198  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

from  the  lips,"  and  are  not  the  meanings  "be  lost,"  "fail,"  or 

the  like  due  to  some  word  used  with  cadere  that  has  tinged  its 

meaning?     Compare  Horace  Epist.  I,  18,  12  sic  Herat  voces  et 

verba  cadentia  tollit.    E.  C.  "Wickham  translates  "picks  up  every 

word  he  lets  drop."     The  verse  from  Horace  gives  us  "verba 

cadunt"  untinged  by  a  modifying  adjective,  adverb,  or  phrase. 

"The  words  fall;  he  picks  them  up."     Juvenal  VI,  440  reads 

verborum  tanta  cadit  vis,  which  is  translated  by  John  Delaware 

Lewis  "such  a  power  of  words  falls  from  her."    If  verba  cadunt 

has  this  meaning,  clearly  vota  cadunt  can  also. 

In  Ovid  Her.  3,  98  at  mea  pro  nullo  pondere  verba  cadunt, 

verba  cadunt  simply  means  "the  words  fall";  the  idea  that  they 

are  vain  comes  from  "pro  nullo  pondere"  ("as  of  no  weight" — 

Palmer).     Propertius  contains  three  passages  that  are  similar: 

I,  10,  24  neu  tibi  pro  vano  verba  benigna  cadant. 
I,  16,  34  at  mea  nocturno  verba  cadunt  Zephyro. 
I,  17,  4     omniaque  ingrato  litore  vota  cadunt. 

In  each  of  these  the  futility  of  the  words  or  prayers  rests  not  in 
cadere,  but  in  pro  vano,  nocturno  Zephyro,  and  ingrato  litore; 
they  are  vain  because  they  do  not  reach  their  goal78  and  fall 
either  on  the  wind  or  the  shore. 

In  the  only  passage  in  Tibullus  resembling  that  under  dis- 
cussion, I,  6,  85,  we  find : 

haec  aliis  maledicta  cadant. 

The  word  aliis  mentioning  the  goal  that  the  maledicta  are  to 
reach,  serves  to  differentiate  this  passage  from  that  under  con- 
sideration. Aside  from  that  however,  "May  these  imprecations 
fall  upon  others ! "  is  perfectly  clear,  and  while  we  may  translate : 
"May  these  curses  come  true  in  the  case  of  others!"  the  first 
rendering  is  satisfactory.79 

The  meaning  of  cadere  here  defended  is  that  first  maintained 
(as  far  as  known  to  me)  by  Becker  (Elegeia  Bomana),so  who 


's  Eothstein  on  Prop.  I,  10,  24. 

"9  Cf.  Becker,  Elegeia  Bomana. 

so  A  view  similar  to  this  is  put  forth  by  Belling,  Wochenschrift  f.  Philol., 
15  (1898),  459,  who  however  makes  no  mention  of  Becker's  statement. 
Thus  Belling:  "vota  cadunt — Es  muss  heissen  'werden  ausgesprochen. 
He  does  not  discuss  the  following  verses. 


>  >  t 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  199 

suggests  that  cadunt  here  means  "  pronuntiantur,  funduntur. " 
In  so  far  I  agree  with  Becker;  he  appears,  however,  to  take 
cadunt  as  an  historical  present,  and  thus  deals  with  the  following 
verses:  "lam,  inquit,  pronunciata  sunt  vota.  Utinam  iis  re- 
spondens  advolet  quam  celerrime  Amor,  portetque  felicissima 
coniugii  vincula." 

If,  however,  one  examines  carefully  the  sentence  introduced 
by  utinam,  he  will  find  that  he  has  here  the  prayer  in  expanded 
form  that  was  foretold  in  verse  11 : 

auguror,  uxoris  fidos  optabis  amores. 
The  idea  in  optare  is  of  course  found  in  utinam  and  the  follow- 
ing subjunctives;  amores  is  expressed  in  advolet  ....  Amor; 
uxoris  we  find  altered  to  coniugio,  and  fidos  is  amplified  into 
vincula,  quae  maneant  semper,  etc.  In  other  words,  we  have  in 
full  that  prayer  which  was  anticipated  and  briefly  summarized. 
It  is  not,  then:  "The  prayers  have  been  uttered;  etc.,"  but 
rather :  ' '  The  prayers  come :  '  May  Love  fly,  etc. '  ' '  This  prayer 
is  concluded  at  the  end  of  verse  20  and  then  the  poet  continues : 

hie  veniat  (Natalis,  ades)  prolemque  ministret. 
Hie  can  only  refer  to  Amor  whose  coming  has  just  been  prayed 
for;  that  is,  the  poet's  "hie  veniat"  is  his  own  reiteration  of 
Cornutus'  "advolet  ....  Amor."  The  same  pronoun,  hie,  is 
the  subject  of  ministret.  The  term  ministrare,  as  applied  to  the 
god  Amor,  Tibullus  used  in  I,  10,  57  at  lascivus  Amor  rixae  mala 
verba  ministrat,  and  it  also  appears  in  III,  12  (IV,  6),  12  fallen- 
dique  vias  mille  ministret  Amor.  That  moreover  Amor  should 
be  called  on  to  bring  offspring,  is  in  harmony  with  II,  1,  83-4, 
where  he  is  to  be  called  to  the  herd  to  make  it  prolific : 

vos  celebrem  cantate  deum  (Amor,  v.  80)  pecorique  vocate, 
voce  palam  pecori,  clam  sibi  quisque  vocet. 

The  change  of  the  MS  reading  avis  to  ades  is  in  itself  but  a 
slight  one,  and  is  also  in  some  measure  defended  by  the  fact  that 
the  reverse  mistake  {ades  written  instead  of  avis)  is  found  in 
the  MSS  of  Tibullus,  II,  1,  34.81 

Ades  here  of  course  is  equal  to  fave :  and  it  is  used  after  a 
prayer  or  wish,  as  in  III,  3,  31-33 : 


81  Cf.  also  Jacoby's  note, on  page  196  of  this  paper. 


200  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

haec  alii  cupiant;  liceat  mihi  paupere  cultu 

securo  cara  coniuge  posse  frui. 
adsis  et  timidis  faveas,  Saturnia,  votis. 

The  direct  address  to  the  deity  after  the  prayer,  and  the  refer- 
ence to  vota  are  parallel  to  this  passage.  The  use  of  adesse 
closely  associated  with  some  form  of  votum  is  found  e.g.  in 
Ovid  Fast.  Ill,  256 ;  Trist.  Ill,  1,  78 ;  Her.  VI,  151-2 ;  Seneca 
Here.  Fur.  645-6 ;  Phaedra  423 ;  so  too  with  precibus,  Ovid  Am. 
II,  13,  21. 

That  in  a  poem  dealing  with  a  birthday,  the  poet  should  at 
the  end  recur  to  the  Natalis,  addressing  him  directly,  is  closely 
paralleled  by  III,  11  (IV,  5),  where  verses  19  and  20  return  to 
a  direct  address  to  Natalis : 

at  tu,  natalis,  quoniam  deus  omnia  sentis, 
adnue. 

In  this  passage  moreover  adnue  is  parallel  to  ades;  and,  besides, 

these  verses  conclude  a  prayer  for  mutual  love  as  in  our  elegy : 

(verses  7-9)   mutuus  adsit  amor,  per  te  dulcissima  furta 
perque  tuos  oculos  per  geniumque  rogo. 
mane  geni,  cape  tura  libens  votisque  faveto. 

Verses  13-16  contain  a  reference  to  the  vinculo  that  in  our  pas- 
sage Love  is  to  bring. 

Ill,  12  (IV,  6)  is  addressed  to  Natalis  luno;  in  it  verses  13 
and  14  bid  dea  casta,  adnue,  and  verses  7  and  8  are  closely 
parallel  to  portions  of  the  elegy  under  discussion : 

at  tu,  sancta,  fave,  neu  quis  divellat  amantes, 
sed  iuveni  quaeso  mutua  vincla  para. 

In  I,  7  (one  of  Tibullus'  own  elegies)  the  last  distich  makes  a 

direct  address  to  Natalis : 

at  tu,  natalis  multos  celebrande  por  annos, 
candidior  semper  candidiorque  veni. 

The  coupling  of  the  appeal  to  Natalis  and  the  prayer  for 
progeny  also  bears  some  resemblance  to  I,  7,  where  we  find  in 
I,  7,  55  at  tibi  succrescat  proles,  etc.,  and  in  63^1,  just  quoted, 
an  appeal  to  the  natal  god.  The  appeal  is  perfectly  natural  in 
the  light  of  the  following  statement  in  Roscher's  Ausfiihrliches 
Lexicon  der  Griechischen  und  Edmiscken  Mythologie,  I,  1615: 
"Dem  Genius  lag  dem  Gesagten  gemass  vornehmlich  die  Tutel 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  201 

des  Ehebettes  ob,  welches  nach  ihm  standig  lectus  genialis  hiess 
(so  an  vielen  Stellen:  bei  Catull  64,  47  aueh  pulvinar  geniale; 
torus  bei  Liv.  30,  12,  21  ist  unsicher).  Nuptiis  sternitur  in 
honorem  genii  erklart  Festi  epit.  94.  .  .  .  Beim  Laberius 
(v.  54  R.)  heisst  derselbe  generis  nostri  parens  d.i.  'das  die 
Familie  von  einer  Generation  zur  andern  erhaltende  Prinzip.' 
(Preller)."  Cf.  Arnobius  2,  67  cum  in  matrimonium  convenitis, 
toga  sternitis  lectulos  et  maritorum  genios  advocatis  .  .  .'.! 
And  so  too  Preller  (Rom.  Mythol.  1,  78)  speaks  of  the  lectus 
genialis  "wo  der  Genius  der  Familie  segnend  und  befruchtend 
waltet,  dass  es  dem  Hause  nie  an  Kindern  fehle." 

And  finally  with  the  interpretation  thus  far  given  of  the  pas- 
sage, tuos  (v.  22)  would  clearly  refer  to  Natalis  just  preceding. 

II,  3,  61 
Proposed  reading: 

at  tibi,  dura,  (seges,  Nemesis,  quia  ducit  ab  urbe) 
persolvat  nulla  semina  terra  fide. 

In  this  distich  the  reading  of  A  is : 

at  tibi  dura  seges  nemesis  qui  abduc  82  ab  urbe, 
persolvat  nulla  semina  terra  fide. 

The  reading  of  V  is  also  nemesis,  but  in  Vm2  and  G  we  read 
nemesim.  For  qui,  £  have  quae.  Instead  of  abduc,  V  reads 
abducit;  £,  abducis.  Some  inferior  MSS  read  quia  ducis,  where 
A  has  qui  abduc. 

All  editors,  as  far  as  I  know,  read  Nemesim  or  Nemesin83  and 
change  abducit  or  ducit  to  the  second  person.84  (Rigler  proposed 
quae  abduxit).    A  typical  reading  is  that  of  Hiller: 

at  tibi  dura  seges,  Nemesim  qui  abducis  ab  urbe, 
persolvat  nulla  semina  certa  fide. 

82  So  Hiller  and  Wilhelm:  abducit  say  Baehrens  and  Postgate.  See 
Wochenschrift  fur  Mass.  Phil.,  23  (1906),  1148. 

83  In  Berliner  phil.  Wochenschrift,  29  (1909),  1467,  Cartault  (1909)— 
whose  work  I  have  not  seen — is  said  to  read  ' '  At  tibi  dura  seges  Nemesis 
qui  abducit  ab  urbe. ' ' 

84  Save  F.  Wilhelm,  N.  Jahrb.  f.  Phil.  u.  Paed.,  151  (1895),  770,  who 
defends  abducit,  its  subject  being  qui  which  in  turn  refers  to  tibi,  by  Tib. 
I,  2,  33.  This  does  not  appear  analogous.  But  in  Rhein.  Museum  59 
(1904),  283,  he  discusses  the  passage,  reading  abducis.  Belling  (Prolego- 
mena, 62)  approves  of  quia  ducit,  but  in  his  "Tibullus"  he  reverts  to  quae 
abducis. 


202  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

Tibi,  thus  taken,  refers  to  the  rich  lover  just  mentioned.     The 
reading  ccrta  (ascribed  to  Pucci)  is  a  substitute  for  terra  O.85 
The  following  variations  in  the  readings  are  found : 

at  changed  to  sit Rossbach,  followed  by  Baehrens. 

seges  changed  to  Ceres N.    Heinsius,    followed   by   Broukhusius, 

Joh.  Schrader,  Heyne,  Voss,  Golbery,  Dissen,  L.  Mueller,  and 

Belling. 
qui  changed  to  quae  (f) Aldus,    Scaliger,    Grasser,    Broukhusius, 

Mattaire,  Joh.  Schrader,  Heyne,  Voss,  Golbery,  Dissen,  Rigler, 

Belling,  Postgate. 
quia  ducis  f 

quae  ducis  f Aldus,  Grasser,  Voss. 

Nemesim  changed  to  Venerem Joh.  Schrader. 

terra  changed  to  certa Lachmann,  Gruppe,  Hiller,  Haupt-Vahlen, 

L.  Mueller,  R.  Ullrich,  F.  Wilhelm. 
For  terra  Statius  and  Canter  proposed  tecta. 

As  has  been  pointed  out,  practically  none  of  the  editors  keep 
Nemesis  and  abducit,  and  most  of  them  make  at  least  one  other 
alteration  in  the  MS  reading.  The  reading  proposed  follows  A 
in  detail,  save  that  quia  (£)  ducit  appears  for  qui  abducit;  in 
other  words,  an  effort  is  made  to  restore  the  text  by  dropping  but 
a  single  letter  of  the  MS  reading  and  in  one  instance  altering  the 
division  into  words. 

The  translation  would  run :  ' '  But  to  thee,  0  cruel  one,  because 
'tis  the  crop,  Nemesis,  that  leads  thee  from  the  city,  may  the 
earth  prove  false  and  fail  to  give  back  the  seeds." 

The  word  quia  appears  in  Tib.  I,  4,  13,  and  the  frequency  of 
its  use  in  Propertius86  warrants  it  appropriateness  in  elegiac- 
poetry  of  this  period. 

The  trajection  of  conjunctions  in  Tibullus  is  exceedingly 
common,  as  this  list87  witnesses  :88 

cum 1,  1,  47;  I,  1,  59;  I,  2,  65;  I,  3,  9;  I,  4,  33;  I,  5,  12;  I,  7,  21; 

I,  7,  61;  I,  10,  8;  II,  1,  47;  II,  3,  29;  II,  5,  14;  II,  5,  109. 

dum 1,  2,  4;  I,  2,  73;  I,  3,  25;  I,  3,  56;  II,  3,  19. 

dummodo 1,  1,  58. 

modo 1,  2,  31. 


ss  But  cf.  Postgate,  Journal  of  Philology,  26  (1898-9),  186. 
so  See  Phillimore,  Index  Verborum  Propertianus. 

87  Derived  from  E.  Schuenke,  Be  traiectione  coniunctionum,  etc.,  Kiliae, 
1906. 

88  This  list  is  confined  to  books  I  and  II. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  203 

ne 1,  1,  67;  I,  3,  21;  I,  5,  5;  I,  6,  20;  I,  8,  29;  I,  9,  17. 

ni 1,  4,  63. 

qua II,  2,  16;  II,  5,  96. 

quam  (saepe) 1,  6,  21. 

qui  (all  forms  of  the  relative) 1,  1,  50;  I,  3,  7;  I,  7,  3;  I,  7,  13; 

I,  9,  24;  I,  9,  72;  I,  10,  1;  I,  10,  6;  II,  4,  10;  II,  4,  45;  II,  5,  16; 

II,  5,  40;  II,  5,  68;  II,  6,  5;  II,  6,  8. 

quicumque 1,  2,  39;  I,  4,  39;  I,  10,  59;  II,  2,  13. 

quod 1,  3,  79. 

quotiens II,  6,  13. 

si 1,  1,  44;  I,  2,  71;  I,  4,  15;  I,  4,  49;  I,  6,  23;  I,  6,  33;  I,  6,  74; 

I,  8,  61;  I,  9,  19;  II,  4,  33;  II,  4,  53. 
ubi 1,  4,  31. 

ut 1,  1,  18;  I,  2,  2;  I,  4,  52;  I,  6,  16;  I,  9,  26;  I,  10,  48;  II,  1,  2; 

II,  1,  15;  II,  1,  50;  II,  3,  45;  II,  5,  72;  II,  6,  42. 

"While  there  are  no  instances  of  a  postponed  quia  in  Tibullus, 
it  may  be  noted  that  the  causal  conjunction  quod  is  found  thus 
deferred.  But  the  trajection  of  quia  is  sufficiently  common  in 
other  authors  to  justify  this  position  here.    It  is  found  in : 

Plautus As.  386;  Cure.  225;  Men.  513;  Mil.  54;  Trin.  1165. 

Lucretius 1,  169;  I,  176;  I,  221;  II,  607;  III,  278;  III,  364;  III, 

746;  III,  1070;  IV,  92;  IV,  241;  IV,  355;  IV,  694;  IV,  1242; 

V,  357;  VI,  349;  VI,  353;  VI,  841;  VI,  909;  VI,  1059. 

Terence Eec.  681. 

Cicero Aratea  12. 

Virgil Aen.  VIII,  650. 

Horace Serm.  I,  3,  92-3  and  I,  9,  51;  Epist.  II,  3,  295  and  II,  3, 

376;  Carm.  IV,  9,  28. 
Aetna 284. 

In  its  opening  as  well  as  in  the  trajection,  the  verse  resembles 
Propertius  III,  18,  31-2 : 

at  tibi,  nauta,  pias  hominum  qui  traicis  umbras, 
hue  animae  portent  corpus  inane  tuae. 

In  the  trajection  and  the  appearance  of  another  vocative  in  the 
subordinate  clause,  Virgil  Aen.  XII,  179-180  is  parallel: 

tuque  inclute  Mavors, 
cuncta  tuo  qui  bella,  pater,  sub  numine  torques. 

Tibullus  himself  in  II,  5,  113-4  has  a  distich  that  closely  re- 
sembles the  one  under  discussion : 

at  tu,  nam  divum  servat  tutela  poetas, 
praemoneo,  vati  parce,  puella,  sacro. 


204  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

The  beginning  at  tu  resembles  the  at  tibi  under  discussion ;  in 
each  instance  we  have  the  causal  clause  closely  following ;  and  in 
each  instance  we  have  a  delayed  vocative. 

Moreover,  in  the  same  way  in  which  the  quia-cl&use  here  pre- 
cedes the  major  portion  of  the  main  clause,  it  appears  in  the  only 
other  instance  of  the  word 's  use  in  Tibullus,  I,  4,  13 : 

hie,  quia  fortis  adest  audacia,  cepit. 
Cf.  also  I,  3,  57-8  and  Propertius  IV,  2,  11  and  IV,  10,  47. 

The  object  of  ducit  is  so  clearly  apparent  that  it  would  seem 
needless  to  express  it  in  this  verse.  So  we  find  abducere  without 
an  object  in  III,  9  (IV,  3),  5: 

sed  procul  abducit  venandi  Delia  cura. 
And  still  nearer  at  hand,  we  have  in  verse  79  of  this  very  elegy : 

ducite:  ad  imperium  dominae  sulcabimus  agros. 
If  abducere  should  be  thought  preferable  to  ducere  here,  it  would 
be  well  to  notice  that  neither  with  abducit,  III,  9  (IV,  3),  5,  nor 
abducta,  III,  14  (IV,  8),  7,  is  the  locus  a  quo  mentioned.    Tibul- 
lus writes,  however,  (I,  2,  43)  hanc  ego  de  caelo  ducentem  sidera 
vidi,   using  the   simple   verb;   and   in   the   following   instances 
Propertius  uses  ducere  together  with  the  locus  a  quo : 
II,  13,  6  aut  possim  Ismaria  ducere  valle  feras. 
II,  1,  56  ex  hac  ducentur  funera  nostra  domo. 

Durus,    as    applied    to    Nemesis,    is    perfectly    appropriate, 
"nam"  (as  Pichon89  says)  "duri  dicuntur  qui  amorem  oblatum 
respuunt  neque  precibus  commoventur."    Thus  in  Tibullus  I,  8, 
50  we  find  in  veteres  esto  dura,  puella,00  senes.    And  in  II,  6,  28 
Nemesis  is  directly  called  so :  ei  mihi,  ne  vincas,  dura  puella, 
deam.    She  is  also  called  saeva  puella  in  II,  4,  6.    Other  passages 
where  mistresses  are  termed  dura  are:    Propertius  I,  1,  9-10 
I,  7,  6;  I,  17,  16;  II,  1,  78;  II,  22,  11;  II,  22,  43;  II,  24,  47 
IV,  2,  23;  Ovid  Am.  I,  9,  19;  Her.  XX,  5;  Ars  Am.  II,  527 
Fast.  IV,  111  and  VI,  120. 

While  dura  is  not  used  substantively  in  Tibullus,  yet  note 
that  it  is  in  the  last  passage  cited  (Ovid  Fast.  VI,  120)  : 


89  Rene  Pichon,  De  sermone  amatorio  apud  Latinos  elegiarum  scriptores, 
Paris,  1902.     From  it  the  following  instances  are  drawn. 

»o  Note  the  sense-pause  between  dura  and  puella.  So  dura  and  seges  in 
this  passage. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  205 

viderat  banc  Ianus,  visaeque  cupidine  captus 
ad  duram  verbis  mollibus  usus  erat. 

Moreover  the  authors  of  the  Corpus  (including  Tibullus  himself) 
use  other  adjectives  substantively  in  the  vocative  case,  often 
indeed  with  forms  of  tu : 

I,  9,  65  nee  tu,  stultissime,  sentis. 

II,  1,  81  sancte,  veni  dapibus  festis. 

III,  8  (IV,  2),  3  at  tu,  violente,  caveto. 
Ill,  10  (IV,  4),  9  sancte,  veni. 

Ill,  12  (IV,  6),  7  at  tu,  sancta,  fave. 

It  may  also  be  noted  that  in  this  very  elegy  (II,  3),  we  find  in 
the  immediate  vicinity  the  following  feminine  forms  of  adjectives 
used  substantively:  formosas  (65)  and  mea  (77). 

As  to  the  form  Nemesis,  Postgate91  admits  that  the  vocative 
in  -is  of  such  Greek  words  is  found  in  prose  and  comedy,  "but," 
he  assumes,  "it  was  not  tolerated  in  the  refined  compositions  of 
the  Hellenizing  poesy."  The  form  Nemesi  is,  however,  of  course 
"metrically  unavailable,"  and  we  do  find  the  vocative  Nemesis 
in  Auson.  Idyll.  8,  41  (III,  5,  41  in  the  edition  of  R.  Peiper) 
mitibus  audi  auribus  hoc,  Nemesis.  Moreover,  the  statement  in 
Charisius  I,  17  implies  no  such  limitation:  "Mysis  o  Mysis 
Terentius,  ut  o  crinis  funis  cinis.  Graeci  demunt  s  litteram, 
nostri  parem  nominativo  vocativum  servant."  And,  most  im- 
portant of  all,  in  this  passage  Nemesis  is  the  reading  of  AV. 

In  the  text  as  reconstituted  seges  assumes  a  very  prominent 
position  and  justly  so,  for  it  is  the  wealth  of  the  country,  its 
crops  and  vintage,  that  lead  Nemesis  away  from  the  city.  And 
it  is  just  because  the  wealth  of  the  country  has  enticed  her  away 
that  the  poet  prays  that  the  earth  may  fail  to  send  up  a  harvest. 

The  method  in  which  the  text  became  corrupted  is  apparent : 
dura,  standing  next  to  seges,  was  taken  to  modify  it;  because 
tibi  was  supposed  to  refer  to  the  lover  just  mentioned,  it  was 
easy  for  quia  to  be  made  into  the  relative  qui,  the  antecedent  of 
which  was  tibi.  The  a  remaining,  together  with  ducit,  under  the 
influence  of  ab  urbe,  easily  became  abducit. 


si  Classical  Review,  23,  186-7.      Tbe  vocative  form  is  discussed  in  Neue- 
Wagener  Formenlehre,  1,  443. 


206  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 


II,  4,  43 
Proposed  reading: 

Sed  veniet  tibi  mors,  nee  erit  qui  lugeat  ullus, 
nee  qui  det  maestas  munus  in  exsequias. 

Where  the  above  reading  proposes  sed,  all  the  MSS  (as  far  as 
known  to  me)  unite  in  the  reading  seu,  nor  is  it  known  that  seu 
has  ever  been  questioned.  Veniet  has  not  escaped  thus,  however ; 
the  reading  of  A  (veniet)  appears  as  veniat  in  VG,  and  this 
latter  reading  is  accepted  by  Scaliger,  Broukhusius,  Voss,  Wun- 
derlich,  Bach,  and  Baehrens.  Moreover  Scaliger,  Dousa,  and 
Broukhusius  alter  nee  erit  to  neque  sit.02  Belling,  too,  though 
not  incorporating  it  in  his  text,  approves  of  nee  sit.93  By  these 
changes  we  should  secure  a  succession  of  present  subjunctives  to 
harmonize  with  eripiant  (40),  spectent  (41),  and  addat  (42). 
Veniet  (and  far  more,  erit)  has  maintained  its  position  (1) 
because  the  reading  of  A;  (2)  as  Dissen  points  out,  "neque 
enim  dubium  venturam  mortem";  (3)  because  of  its  agreement 
with  erit.9i  Reading  then  veniet,  we  should  have  the  verse : 
seu  veniet  tibi  mors,  nee  erit  qui  lugeat  ullus. 

First  of  all,  the  verse  seems  suspicious  because  of  the  thought : 
"Or  if  death  comes."95  Bui  death  will  come;  how  can  it  be 
stated  conditionally?  Tibullus  could  of  course  have  easily 
referred  to  an  early  death  conditionally,  or  a  long-deferred 
death,  but  hardly  to  death  in  general.  Thus  in  the  former  two 
cases,  we  find  in  the  Panegyric,  III,  7  (IV,  1),  205-6 : 

seu  matura  dies  celerem  properat  mihi  mortem, 
longa  manet  seu  vita. 


»2  The  earlier  editions  (e.g.  Aldus  and  Muretus)  have  neque  erit. 

»3  Philol.,  47,  382. 

94  Of  the  examples  cited  by  Voss  wherein  a  present  subjunctive  in  the 
protasis  is  found  coupled  with  a  future  indicative  in  the  apodosis,  Virg. 
Eel.,  IV,  58,  "Pan  ....  mecum  si  ...  .  certet,  Pan  ....  dicet  se  .  .  .  . 
victum,"  should  evidently  be  read  dicat.  In  Prop.  II,  26,  29,  clearly  the 
fact  stated  in  the  protasis  is  unlikely  to  come  to  pass  (therefore  present 
subjunctive);  but  should  it  come  true,  the  conclusion  would  inevitably  be 
realized  (therefore  future  indicative).  But  in  our  passage  the  first  is 
absolutely  certain,  is  not  in  any  sense  unlikely. 

»6  Cranstoun  translates:  "When  death  shall  come,"  but  no  authority 
is  cited  for  this  meaning. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  207 

But  as  to  the  inevitableness  of  death,  listen  to  Tibullus  I,  1,  70 : 

iam  veniet  tenebris  mors  adoperta  caput. 
and  I,  10,  34 : 

imminet  [mors]  et  tacito  clam  venit  ilia  pede. 
The  time  may  be  doubtful,  but  never  the  fact : 

I,  1,  59-60  te  spectem,  suprema  mihi  cum  venerit  hora, 
te  teneam  moriens  deflciente  manu. 

So  too  III,  2,  9  foil,  and  III,  3,  9-10.96     The  only  conditional 

expressions  noted  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum  in  connection  with 

death  are : 

I,  3,  53  quod  si  fatales  iam  nunc  explevimus  annos. 
Ill,  5,  31-2  vivite  felices,  memores  et  vivite  nostri, 
sive  erimus  seu  nos  fata  fuisse  velint. 

But  in  neither  of  these  is  it  doubted  that  death  will  surely  come, 
the  only  element  of  doubt  being  that  of  its  coming  at  a  specific 
time.  The  second  quotation,  for  example,  reads:  "Live  happily 
and  live  remembering  me  whether  (at  that  time)  I  shall  be  living 
or  the  fates  should  wish  my  life  to  be  no  more."  In  other 
words,  "if  I  shall  be  living  at  a  definite  time"  (expressed  or 
implied)  is  quite  a  different  thing  from  saying  "if  death  shall 
come." 

The  second  objection  to  the  verse  lies  in  the  word  seu.  Sive 
and  seu  are  found  in  pairs97  in  the  following  passages  in  the 
Corpus  Tibullianum : 

I,  l,  11-12.  Ill,  7  (IV,  l),  45-6. 

I,  2,  17-18  III,  7  (IV,  1),  66. 

I,  2,  33.  Ill,  7  (IV,  1),. 79-80. 

I,  10,  21-22.  Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  95. 

II,  4,  5.  Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  96. 

II,  6,  3.  Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  101-3. 

III,  1,  6.  Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  159-60. 
Ill,  1,  26.  HI,  8  (IV,  2),  9-10. 
Ill,  3,  14.  Ill,  8  (IV,  2),  11-12. 
Ill,  4,  11-12.  Ill,  9  (IV,  3),  1-2. 
Ill,  5,  32. 

We  find  a  group  of  three  in  III,  7  (IV,  1),  25-6  and  a  group  of 


ss  Cf.   Prop.   II,   13,   17,   "quandocumque   igitur   nostros   mors   claudet 
ocellos. " 

97  i.e.  sive  (or  seu)  used  twice,  or  sive  with  seu. 


208  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

five  in  III,  7  (IV,  1),  205-9.  The  only  uses  of  a  single  seu98  or 
sive  are  the  following : 

I,  6,  21  exibit  quam  saepe,  time,  seu  visere  dicet 

sacra  Bonae  maribus  non  adeunda  Deae. 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  94  seu  libeat. 

The  first  (the  only  one  in  Tibullus)  is  to  be  translated  "even 
if";99  the  second,  "or  if."  The  first  meaning  is  not  possible 
here;  it  would  take  the  fact  of  death,  already  conditioned  so 
abnormally,  and  place  it  even  farther  in  the  range  of  improba- 
bility. The  second  is,  of  course,  no  criterion  for  the  usage  of 
Tibullus,  as  it  occurs  in  the  Panegyric ;  moreover  it  would  retain 
the  conditional  force  which  is  so  unnatural  here. 

Draeger100  cites  the  following  examples  of  a  single  sive  or 
seu  =  " or  if"  in  the  poets:  Horace  Od.  I,  6,  19;  I,  15,  24;  III, 
27,  61;  Serm.  II,  1,  59;  perhaps  Virgil  Aen.  XI,  327;  Tibullus 
II,  4,  43  ;101  IV,  I,  93 ;  Propertius  III,  21,  8  and  33 ;  IV,  6,  81  and 
Ovid  Her.  X,  97.  The  use  is  therefore  a  rather  rare  one,  and  in 
the  meaning  here  suggested  has  no  warrant  in  Tibullus'  diction. 

The  objections  to  seu  are  therefore  two-fold :  first  and  more 
important,  as  to  sense,  and  second,  as  to  the  use  of  seu  in 
Tibullus. 

For  it  the  reading  sed  is  proposed.  This  involves  the  change 
of  but  a  single  letter,  and  the  alteration  of  the  d  can  easily  be 
accounted  for  by  the  initial  letter  of  the  following  word.  We 
should  then  have  (after  the  wishes  of  verses  39-42)  :  "But  death 
will  come  to  thee,  and  there  will  be  no  one  to  mourn. ' '  In  other 
words,  the  adversative  conjunction  sed  with  the  future  indica- 
tive, stating  a  fact  as  unmistakable  after  a  previous  wish, 
acquires  the  tone  of  "but  however  that  may  be,"  "but  however 
my  wish  may  turn  out ' ' ;  that  is,  it  discusses  the  destined  future 
state  even  if  the  wish  be  not  fulfilled.  For  this  use,  compare 
Horace  Serm.  II,  1,  42-6 : 


»8  Excluding  the  passage  under  discussion,  of  course. 

99  See  Dissen's  note.  This  use  is  classed  by  Draeger  under  the  follow- 
ing: "Dies  sive,  welches  fur  vel  si  steht,  ist  zuweilen,  aber  nur  in  der 
Sprache  der  Juristen  und  der  Dichter,  einem  voraufgehenden  Satze  oder 
Ausdrucke  coordinirt,  der  zwar  nicht  die  Form,  aber  den  Sinn  eines 
Bedingungssatzes  hat." 

ioo  Historische  Syntax  der  Lateinischen  Sprache,  II,  149. 

ioi  The  passage  here  under  discussion. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  209 

o  pater  et  rex 
Iuppiter,  ut  pereat  positum  rubigine  telum, 
nee  quisquam  noceat  cupido  mini  pacis!  at  ille 
qui  me  commorit  (melius  non  tangere,  clamo), 
flebit  et  insignis  tota  cantabitur  urbe. 

Somewhat  analogous  is  Propertius  I,  8,  9  foil. : 

O  utinam  hibernae  duplicentur  tempora  brumae, 

et  sit  iners  tardis  navita  Vergiliis, 
nee  tibi  Tyrrhena  solvatur  funis  harena, 

neve  inimica  meas  elevet  aura  preces! 
atque  ego  non  videam  tales  subsidere  ventos, 

cum  tibi  provectas  auferet  unda  rates, 
ut  me  defixum  vacua  patiatur  in  ora 

crudelem  infesta  saepe  vocare  manu! 
sed  quocumque  modo  de  me,  periura,  mereris, 

sit  Galatea  tuae  non  aliena  viae. 

Cf .  also  Lygdamus  III,  5,  27-8  : 

atque  utinam  vano  nequiquam  terrear  aestu! 
languent  ter  quinos  sed  mea  membra  dies. 

Ill,  4,  62-3  also  bears  on  this  use  of  sed: 

a  pereat,  didicit  fallere  si  qua  virum. 
sed  flecti  poterit:  mens  est  mutabilis  illis. 

We  find  an  excellent  parallel,  though  the  adversative  conjunc- 
tion is  not  expressed,  in  I,  9,  11  foil. : 

at  deus  ilia 
in  cinerem  et  liquidas  munera  vertat  aquas, 
iam  mihi  persolvet  poenas,  pulvisque  decorem 

detrahet  et  ventis  horrida  facta  coma; 
uretur  facies,  urentur  sole  capilli, 

deteret  invaiidos  et  via  longa  pedes. 

The  position  of  sed  at  the  beginning  of  the  sentence  and  verse 
is  sufficiently  justified  by  I,  10,  15 ;  I,  10,  53 ;  II,  1,  31 ;  II,  4,  24, 
etc. 

As  to  the  uniting  of  three  coordinate  members  by  nee  between 
the  first  and  second,  and  also  between  the  second  and  third,  one 
may  readily  compare  the  following: 

I,  1,  37-8  adsitis,  divi,  nee  [neu  A]  vos  e  paupere  mensa 
dona  nee  e  puris  spernite  fictilibus. 

I,  1,  71-2  iam  subrepet  iners  aetas,  nee  amare  decebit, 

dicere  nee  cano  blanditias  capite. 

II,  3,  11-13  pavit  et  Admeti  tauros  formosus  Apollo. 

nee  cithara  intonsae  profueruntve  comae, 
nee  potuit'euras  sanare  salubribus  herbis. 


210  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

And  again,  for  sed  ....  nee  ....  nee,  a  pretty  close  parallel 

may  be  found  in  this  very  elegy,  II,  4,  33-4 : 

sed  pretium  si  grande  feras,  custodia  victa  est, 
nee  prohibent  claves,  et  canis  ipse  tacet. 

In  other  words,  by  reading  sed  we  remove  the  thought  of 
death  as  conditional  and  a  rather  suspicious  use  of  seu  in 
Tibullus.  We  introduce  a  word,  the  loss  of  which  may  easily  be 
accounted  for  palaeographically,  and  which  fits  the  sense  of  the 
passage  and  is  in  harmony  with  Tibullus'  usage. 

II,  5,  47 

Proposed  reading: 

ecce  mihi  lucent  rutilis  incendia  castris. 

This  reading  is  simply  a  restoration  of  the  spelling  of  A  and 
V.  Rutulis,  as  spelled  in  £,102  is  found  in  every  edition  of 
Tibullus  known  to  me.  The  first  suggestion  that  another  read- 
ing might  be  preferable  is  found  in  Statius:  "In  scriptis  non- 
nullis,  Rutilis.  Forte  rutila,  fulgentia  dixit,  ut  Horat.  in  I  od.103 
'seu  te  fulgentia  signis  Castra  tenent.'  "  The  only  other 
scholar,  as  far  as  known  to  me,  who  suspected  Rutulis,  was 
Carlo  Pascal,104  who  proposed  ecce  mihi  lucent  rutilis  incendia 
classis.105 

It  is,  to  be  sure,  but  a  slight  change  from  rutilis  to  Rutulis, 
and  the  reference  to  the  early  conflicts  of  Aeneas  in  Italy  might 
easily  suggest  a  mention  of  his  enemies,  the  Rutulians.  Read- 
ing RuUdis  then,  three  possible  interpretations  of  the  passage 
are  suggested.  First,  that  the  Rutula  ....  castra  was  the  city 
of  Ardea,106  the  burning  of  which  is  mentioned,  for  example,  in 
Ovid  Met.  XIV,  572  foil.  :107 


102  What  appears  in  G,  I  do  not  know,  but  from  Baehrens'  critical  note 
I  infer  that  Rutulis  is  its  reading. 

103  Hor.  Od.  I,  7,  19-20. 

loiBivista  di  Filologia,  17  (1889),  452-4. 

105  This  reading  takes  rutilis  as  an  adjective  of  the  third  declension, 
but,  as  Cartault  points  out,  its  use  here  would  be  "avec  une  faute  de 
quantity. ' ' 

ice  Suggested  as  a  possibility  by  Heyne. 

io7  It  is  of  course  true  that  in  some  respects  the  two  passages  resemble 
each  other. 


1912]         Beutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  211 

tandemque  Venus  victricia  nati 
arma  videt,  Turnusque  cadit,  cadit  Ardea,  Turno 
sospite  dicta  potens.     Quam  postquam  barbarus  ignis 
abstulit,  et  tepida  latuerunt  tecta  favilla, 
congerie  e  media  turn  primum  cognita  praepes 
subvolat,  et  cineres  plausis  everberat  alis. 

In  answer  to  this  interpretation,  it  may  be  said  that  no  passage 
is  cited  where  Ardea  is  termed  castra  or  Rutula  castra;  and 
even  if  there  were,  there  is  in  our  elegy  not  the  slightest  mention 
of  Ardea,  so  as  to  bring  it  to  mind  when  the  Rutula  castra  is 
referred  to. 

In  the  second  place,  Cyllenius,  Wunderlich,  Voss,  and 
Huschke  take  incendia  =  faces,  namely,  those  that  are  now 
ready  in  the  camp  of  the  Rutulians  to  attempt  to  burn  the  fleet 
of  the  Trojans.  This  is  referred  to  in  Virgil  Aen.  IX,  69  foil, 
and  Ovid  Met.  XIV,  530  foil.  It  is  true,  to  be  sure,  that  in  each 
of  these  accounts  incendia  practically  =  faces;  but  it  is  far  more 
accurate  to  say  that  in  the  two  passages  cited  the  word  means 
"flames"  and  the  context  shows  that  faces  are  thought  of. 

Virgil  Aen.  IX,  71-2  sociosque  incendia  poscit  ovantis 

atque  manum  pinu  flagranti  fervidus  implet. 

Ovid  Met.  XIV,  539-40  '  Irrita  sacrilega  iactas  incendia  dextra, 

Turne,'  ait.ios 

In  our  passage  there  is  not  the  slightest  hint  that  faces  are 
alluded  to;  but,  even  beyond  this,  would  it  be  likely  that  in  her 
prophecy  the  seeress  would  refer,  and  that  too  in  such  impas- 
sioned language,  merely  to  the  preparations  for  the  burning  and 
not  to  the  actual  flames  amid  the  ships  of  the  Trojans  ?  Cf .  Ovid 
Met.  XIV,  532-4 : 

iamque  picem  et  ceras  alimentaque  cetera  flammae 
Mulciber  urebat,  perque  altum  ad  carbasa  malum 
ibat,  et  incurvae  fumabant  transtra  carinae. 

The  third  interpretation,  stated  by  Heyne109  and  accepted  by 
modern  scholars,  is  thus  phrased  by  Postgate :  ' '  The  burning  of 
Turnus'  camp  is  not  mentioned  in  Virgil."     One  might  infer 


108  The  word  faces  appears  at  the  very  beginning  (531)  of  the  account 
of  the  attempted  burning. 

loo « « Ergo  necesse  est,  fuisse  inter  veteres  de  Troianorum  rebus  in 
Italia  fabulas  etiam  aliquam  narrationem  de  castris  Turni  ab  Aenea  captis 
et  incensis,  etsi  a  Virgilio  praeteritam"  (Heyne). 


212  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

from  this  that  it  is  mentioned  in  some  other  author,  but,  if  so, 
the  various  editors  have  entered  into  a  conspiracy  of  silence.  It 
is  surely  true  that  there  may  have  been  a  firing  of  the  Rutulian 
camp  by  the  Trojans,  but  what  right  have  we  to  alter  the  read- 
ing of  the  MSS  in  order  to  get  an  allusion  to  an  event,  the  only 
mention  of  which  appears  in  this  very  word? 

Recurring  to  the  whole  passage,  we  find  that  the  Sibyl  refers 
only  to  the  more  important  events  in  the  future  history  of  the 
Trojans,  the  events  familiar  to  everyone  who  has  even  a  slight 
knowledge  of  the  classics.  Thus  in  verse  40  we  have  the  refer- 
ence to  the  exiled  Aeneas  bearing  the  Trojan  sacra  in  his  ships ; 
in  verses  43  and  44  the  death  of  Aeneas,  the  purification  in  the 
Numicius  and  his  becoming  "deus  indiges"110  are  all  mentioned. 
And  in  the  following  verses  we  have  allusions  to  Turnus'  death, 
Laurentum,  Lavinium,  the  founding  of  Alba  Longa,  Rhea  Silvia 
and  the  love  of  Mars.  Finally  the  wide  domain  of  the  future 
Roman  state  is  foretold.  In  this  summary  of  important  events 
in  the  history  of  the  Trojan  settlement  in  Italy,  ecce  mihi  lucent 
....  incendia  would  suggest  but  one  thing,  i.e.  the  attempt  of 
the  Rutulians  to  burn  the  Trojan  fleet  and  camp.  Cf.  Virgil 
Aen.  IX,  69 : 

classem,  quae  lateri  castrorum  adiuncta  latebat. 
This  attempt,  frustrated  only  by  the  gods,  is  described  at  length 
in  the  Aeneid  IX,  69  foil,  and  Ovid  Met.  XIV,  530  foil.      As 
has  been  mentioned  previously,  the  ships  were  actually  on  fire, 
so  that  the  term  incendia  is  perfectly  appropriate. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  word  rutilus.  It  is  used  frequently 
in  Latin  as  an  epithet  of  fire : 

Virgil  Aen.  VIII,  430  rutili  tris  (radios)  ignis. 

Virgil  Georg.  I,  454  rutilo  ....  igni. 

Ovid  Fast.  Ill,  285-6  Ecce  deum  genitor  rutilas  per  nubila  flammas 
spargit. 

Ovid  Met.  IV,  402  foil.  Tecta  repente  quati,  pinguesque  ardere  videntur 
lampades  et  rutilis  collucere  ignibus  aedes. 

So  too  Ovid  Met.  XI,  435-6  and  XII,  294-5 ;  Her.  Ill,  64 ;  and 
Stat.  Theb.  IV,  5-6.  From  this  it  would  be  but  a  step  to  the 
use  of  rutilus  in  connection  with  objects  reddened  by  fire.     We 


no  Cf.  Ov.  Met.  XIV,  597-608. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  213 

find  in  Sil.  Ital.  XVI,  232  sed  prorupturis  rutilabant  aequora 

flammis  (of  the  dawn)  ;  Stat.  Theb.  X,  84CM:  reads: 

ardua  mox  torvo  metitur  culmina  visu, 
innumerosque  gradus,  gemina  latus  arbore  clusus, 
aerium  sibi  portat  iter,  longeque  timendus 
multifidam  quercum  flagranti  lumine  vibrat; 
arma  rubent  una  clipeoque  incenditur  ignis. 

And,  while  it  is  not  strictly  parallel,  mention  may  be  made  of 
Ovid  Met.  XII,  276-7,  ferrum  igne  rubens  (red-hot). 

The  adjective  "red"  is  not  a  permanent  epithet  of  the  camp; 
it  is  simply  rutilus  because  of  the  fire.  Thus  in  Virgil  Georg. 
Ill,  358-9  we  read  nee  cum  praecipitem  Oceani  rubro  [Sol] 
lavit  aequore  currum.  Forbiger's  note  is:  "rubro  aequore  pro 
rubescente  a  sole,  igneo. "  Again  Horace  Od.  I,  2,  2-4  run  as 
follows : 

et  rubente 
dextera  sacras  iaculatus  arces 
[Pater]  terruit  Urbem. 

E.  C.  Wickham's  comment  is  "red  from  the  flames  of  the  bolt 

which  he  is  launching,"  and  the  note  in  the  edition  of  Orelli- 

Baiter-Hirschf elder    reads    "a    repercusso    fulminum    rubore. " 

But  a  far  bolder  use  is  that  in  Valerius  Flaccus  V,  450-1 : 

et  iam  rutilis  correpta  venenis 
implicat  igne  domos. 

The  lexicon  of  Facciolatus  and  Forcellinus  comments :  ' '  rutilis ; 
h.e.  incendia  portantibus. "  On  the  basis  of  such  passages,  par- 
ticularly Horace  Od.  I,  2,  2-4  and  Virgil  Georg.  Ill,  358-9,  it 
seems  possible  to  take  rutilis  ....  castris  as  the  camp  reddened 
by  flames.  The  meaning  of  rutilis  is  surely  made  clear  by  lucent 
and  incendia. 

If  it  be  urged  that  a  reference  to  the  attempted  burning  of 
the  fleet  is  out  of  place  in  a  prophecy  wherein  the  future 
triumphs  of  the  Trojans  and  their  descendants  are  mentioned, 
it  may  be  noted  that  several  other  unfortunate  circumstances 
are  alluded  to,  though  in  each  case  a  compensation  for  it  is 
mentioned.  In  verse  42  the  lares  are  termed  errantes,  though  in 
the  same  verse  vocat  ....  Jwspita  terra.  The  death  of  Aeneas 
which  is  implied  is  compensated  for  by  his  deification.    The  ships 


214  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

are  termed  fessae,  but  Victory  at  last  comes  to  them.    So  might 

one  not  feel  here  that  for  the  attempted  burning  alluded  to  in 

verse  47  the  death  of  Turnus  is  retribution  ? 

ecce  mihi  lucent  rutilis  incendia  castris: 
iam  tibi  praedico,  barbare  Turne,  necem. 


Ill,  6,  3 
Proposed  reading: 

aufer  et  ipse  meum  pariter  medica  arte  dolorem. 

This  verse,  on  the  reading  of  which  all  the  best  MSS  agree, 
has  been  the  happy  hunting-ground  of  the  emendator.  The 
reading  of  AVG  Plant,  is  pariter  medicanclo.111  This  reading  is 
found  in  editions  before  Broukhusius,  as  well  as  in  Maittaire 
and  Lachmann.  Statius  made  the  change  of  medicando  to 
medicande,  which  was  accepted  among  others  by  Guyet,  Brouk- 
husius, Voss,  Golbery,  Dissen  and  F.  Wilhelm.112  Waarden- 
burg's  patera  medicante  has  been  chosen  by  Santen,  Gruppe, 
Haupt- Vahlen,  L.  Mueller,  Hiller,  and  Postgate.113  Among  other 
readings  suggested  are :  Huschke — medicate;  Heyne — pater  et 
medicare ;114  Baehrens — pater  o,  medicare;  Birt  (ad  hist,  hexam. 
Lat.  symb.  Bonnae  1876,  p.  47) — patera  medicare.  Belling  in 
his  Prolegomena  suggests  "hue  ades  atque  meum  pariter  medi- 
care dolorem,"  and  in  his  Albius  Tibullus:  Untersuchung  und 
Text,  pariter  temptate.  Postgate 's  suggestion  is  pariles 
medicate.113 

The  reading  of  the  MSS  (pariter  medicando)  seems  syntacti- 
cally, and,  more  especially,  metrically  impossible  (i.e.  at  this 
period  of  Latin).115  Medicande,  involving  the  slightest  change, 
would  mean  "you  who  also  need  to  be  cured,"  and  a  reference 


in  "pariter  comp. "  Hiller  says. 

112  N.  Jahrb.  f.  Phil.  u.  Paed.,  147  (1893),  769  foil. 

us  But  note  Postgate 's  objection  to  patera  in  the  Classical  Beview,  9 
(1895),  77,  and  the  Journal  of  Philology,  25  (1897),  59. 

ii4  Heyne  says:  "Wacker  Medebach.  in  Amoen.  p.  72  nuper  emendare 
vidimus:  'Adfer  et  ipse  merum,  pater,  et  medicare  dolorem.'  "  Heyne 
also  suggested  (though  admitting  its  remoteness  from  the  MS  reading): 
"Aufer  et  indomitum  succo  medicante  dolorem." 

us  See  Belling,  Prol.,  76-7. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  215 

to  Bacchus'  love  for  Ariadne  is  suggested.116  But  love's  pain  is 
to  be  cured  by  forgetfulness ;  does  Bacchus,  the  successful  lover, 
need  that  sort  of  remedy?  As  Belling117  puts  it,  "jener  Aus- 
druck,  der  den  Gott  als  gegenwartig  liebeskrank,  als  ungliick- 
lich  Liebenden  vorstellt,  (ist)  unertraglich  schief."  The  love 
affair  with  Ariadne  (see  verses  39  foil,  of  this  elegy)  is  past ;  he  is 
therefore  not  now  medicandus.  Moreover  it  is  not  an  adventure 
in  which  Bacchus'  situation  as  represented  by  Lygdamus  is  in 
any  wise  comparable  with  his  own. 

The  conjectures  which  introduce  the  word  patera  are  un- 
happy; the  patera115  is  the  libation  bowl,  not  the  cup  the  lover 
will  use  to  drain  draughts  of  healing  for  his  love. 

I  have  therefore  suggested  for  medicando,  medica  arte.  The 
expression  appears  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum,  II,  3,  14 : 

quidquid  erat  medicae  vicerat  artis  amor. 
Medicus  appears  also  in  III,  10  (IV,  4),  3-4: 

crede  mihi,  propera:  nee  te  iam,  Phoebe,  pigebit 
formosae  medicas  applicuisse  manus. 

The  appropriateness  of  the  expression  is  apparent,  pariter  look- 
ing forward  to  the  next  verse,  as  others  have  noted.  "Do  thou 
even  thyself  remove  in  like  wise  my  pain  by  thy  healing  skill; 
often  has  love  perished,  conquered  by  thy  gift."  For  similarities 
in  expression  one  may  compare  : 

Propertius  III,  17,  3-4118  tu  potes  insanae  Veneris  compescere  fastus, 

curarumque  tuo  fit  medicina  mero. 
Tibullus  I,  2,  1  adde  merum  vinoque  novos  compesce  dolores. 
Ovid  Bern.  Am.  75-7119  Te  precor  incipiens,  adsit  tua  laurea  nobis, 
carminis  et  medicae,  Phoebe,  repertor  opis; 
tu  pariter  vati,  pariter  succurre  medenti. 
Ovid  Bern.  Am.  131-2  temporis  ars  medicina  ferest:   data  tempore 

prosunt, 
et  data  non  apto  tempore  vina  nocent. 
Ovid  Bern.  Am.  135  nostrae  medicabilis  arti. 


lie  For  a  defence  of  medicande,  see  F.  Wilhelm's  articles,  N.  Jahrb.  f. 
Phil.  u.  Paed.,  1893,  p.  769,  and  1895,  p.  775. 

ii7  Prol.,  p.  76. 

us  Cf.  also  Prop.  I,  5,  27-8;  II,  1,  57;  III,  17,  9-10. 

us  Cf.  Rene  Pichon,  Be  sermone  amatorio,  etc.,  Paris,  1902  (sub 
medicina,  mederi,  medicus). 


216  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

The  change  palaeographically  from  medica  arte  to  medi- 
cando120  is  not  difficult  to  explain.  The  ending  -do  is  clearly 
due  to  the  following  word,  dolorem.  (The  corruption  of  -te  to 
-do  is  also  found  in  Ovid  Her.  IX,  126:  tegente  P;  tegendo  G.) 
I  have  noted  the  following  instances  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum 
where  the  error  in  the  IMS  reading  may  to  some  extent  have  been 
due  to  the  beginning  of  the  following  word:121 

following  word 
I,  3,  87  at  Par;  ac  A  circa. 

I,  7,  13  an  f ;  at  A  te. 
Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  78  erroris  F;  errorum  A  miseri. 
Ill,  16,  (IV,  10)  6  ne  f ;  nee  A  cedani. 

II,  4,  2  paterna  G;  paterve  A  vale. 

The  confusion  between  arte  and  ante  appears  in  Tib.  II,  1,  24 
where  for  ante,  £  read  arte.  In  Prop.  II,  3,  42,  for  in  arte  D 
(the  accepted  reading),  NFV  read  in  ante. 

The  error  in  the  MS  reading  (if  the  conjecture  be  accepted) 
is  in  large  measure  due  to  an  improper  division  of  words,  two 
words  being  written  as  one.  The  following  instances  of  this  very 
mistake  appear  in  the  MSS  of  Tibullus  :122 

I,  1,  44  si  licet  f ;  scilicet  A  Par. 

1,  5,  7  per  te  G;  parce  A. 

I,  6,  40  et  fluit  f ;  effluit  A. 

I,  8,  39  iuvant  quae  V;  iuvatque  A. 

II,  4,  17  et  qualis  f ;  equalis  A. 

II,  6,  16  st  licet  f ;  scilicet  A. 

III,  1,  15  per  vos  G;  parvos  A. 

Ill,  4,  87  canis  anguinea  G  Cuiacianus  Plant. 


,  ;  consanguinea  A. 
cams  anguma  Postgate 

{termine  A  (supra  scr.  ab  al. 
manu  ge). 
tergemine,  G  Cuiacianus. 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  189  ante  actos  (accepted  ._.      ,T     "       . 

:„  J  accitos  V  Cuiacianus. 

I  accitus  A. 

Ill,  17  (IV,  11),  1  pia  cura  f;  placitura  A. 

At  other  times  the  improper  division  of  words  has  corrupted  the 
reading  by  breaking ,  up  one  word  into  two.  The  MSS  of 
Tibullus  show  the  following  instances  of  this  sort  of  corruption : 


120  A  possible  order  of  corruption  is:  medica  arte — medicarte — medicante 
— medicando. 

121  There  is  no  attempt  at  completeness  in  this  list. 

122  There  is  no  attempt  at  completeness  in  this  list. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  217 

I,  4,  29  deperdit  Par.;  te  perdit  A. 

I,  7,  9   Tarbella  Scaliger;  tua  bella  A. 

I,  9,  19  divitiis  f;  0  viciis  AV. 

Ill,  7,  (IV,  1),  39  castrisve  Par.  Plant.;  cartis  ne  A. 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  73  more  f  Plant.;  fef  ore  A. 

ttt    n  /tit    -i  \    -i  ^o       •       ^  •     o  i        •       (  *e«  iunctum  A  Plant. 
Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  103  seiunctim  Salmasius;J  .  ^ 

|  seu  vmctum  Par. 

Finally  error  is  caused  by  improperly  dividing  words,  even 
where  the  number  of  words  employed  is  not  altered,  e.g.  II,  6,  21, 
in  which  credit  aratis  appears  in  Fr.  as  credita  ratis. 

It  is  apparent,  then,  how  numerous  the  instances  are  wherein 
the  text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum  has  suffered  through  an 
improper  word-division ;  the  other  changes  in  medica  arte  are 
easily  explainable  palaeographically.  The  expression  is  more- 
over in  harmony  with  the  elegiac  diction  and  appropriate  to  the 
sense  of  the  passage. 


Ill,  12  (IV,  6),  19-20 

Proposed  reading: 

si  iuveni  grata  est,  veniet  cum  proximus  annus, 
hie  idem  votis  mutuus  adsit  amor. 
MSS : 

sis  F;  si  AVG  A  (of  Lachmann)  ;  sit  G2;  sic  f. 

iuveni  AFVG. 

veniet  AVG  Cuiacianus;  et  veniet  f;  ac  veniet  f;  adveniet  G2  Plant. 

iam  vetus  O  Plant,  (where  mutuus  stands  in  verse  20). 

esset  O ;  adsit  f  Plant. ;  ut  sit  G2. 

The  reading  of  verse  19  is  seriously  disputed ;  in  verse  20  all 
editions  seen  read  adsit  save  Scaliger 's,  which  retain  esset.123 
Vetus  is  also  generally  read;124  Prien125  however  proposed  ratus, 
which  Baehrens  incorporated  in  his  text126  and  H.  Graef127 
approved.    C.  M.  Francken128  is  also  dissatisfied  with  vetus. 


123  Statius — ut  sit:   Baehrens — "fort,  extet":   Cartault   (1909) — exstet 
and  vobis  for  votis. 

124  As  far  as  I  know,  no  one  alters  iam. 

!25  Die  Symmetric  und  Eesponsion  der  rbmischen  Elegie,  p.  8. 
12e  gee  also  Baehrens'  Tibullische  Blatter,  p.  91. 
127  Annotationes  ad  Tibullum  (Particula  altera),  Memel.,  1885. 
^Mnernos.  n.s.,  13  (1885),  185. 


218  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

It  is,  however,  in  the  first  verse  that  we  find  the  main  diffi- 
culties, and  so  the  less  unanimity  of  agreement  on  the  part  of 
scholars.    The  various  important  readings  are  as  follows: 

sit  iuveni  grata,  adveniet — Aldus,  Sessa,  Muretus,  Grasser. 
sic  iuveni  gratum,  veniet — Statius,  Kraffert  (with  colon  after 

gratum)  .129 
sic  iuveni  grata,  veniet — Scaliger.130 

sic  iuveni  gratis,  veniet — Heinsius,i3i  Broukhusius,  Volpi,  Heyne.132 
sit  iuveni  grata,  ac,  veniet — Passerat,  J.  Dousa,  Maittaire,   Delphin 

Classics,  Voss,  Wunderlich,  Bach,  Golbery,  Hertzberg,  L.  Doe- 

derlein.     Heyne  also  approves  of  this  reading,  after  changing 

the  order  of  the  preceding  distichs. 
sternuit  ilia:  ratum  est — Herel  (see  Heyne 's  edition), 
sic  iuveni  placeat:  veniet — Huschke. 
si,  iuveni  grata  veniet — Lachmann,  Dissen. 
si.  iuveni  gratae  veniet — Lachmann  proposed, 
sis  iuveni  cara — Dissen  proposed. 

sis,  Iuno,  grata  C  ac  |  veniet — Gruppe,  Prien,  Graef.      So  also,  sub- 
)  et  (         stituting  ut    (Eberz)   before  veniet — Hil- 
ler,i33  Postgate,i3*  Jurenka. 
diva,  veni  grata,  ut  verteret  cum — Baehrens.135 
sit  iuveni  grata,  et  veniet — Vahlen  (ed.  V),  Jacoby. 
sit  iuveni  gratum:  veniet — Mueller, 
si  iuveni  gratum,  veniet — Eigler. 
sis  iuveni  grata;  adveniet — Rossbach. 
sit  iuveni  grata:  veniet — K.  P.  Schulze.iso 
sit  iuveni  grata,  ut,  veniet — A.  Otto.13? 
sic  iuveni  gratae,  veniet — Belling.iss 
sic  iuveni  grato  veniet — Ehwald.139 
sis  iuveni  grata  ac — Cartault. 


129  Beitrage  zur  Kritik  und  Erlcldrung  lateinischer  Autoren,  III  Teil, 
Aurich,  1883. 

130  Scaliger:  "grata  hoc  est  gratare.  " 

131  Heinsius:  "gratis  iuveni  votis  adsit  Amor  iterum  anno  proxime 
venturo. ' ' 

132  But  he  was  dissatisfied  with  this  reading. 

133  In  the  Corpus  poetarum  Latinorum  (1893),  he  reads:  "sis  iuveni 
grata,  ut. ' ' 

is*  In  his  Selections;  in  his  edition  he  marks  the  verse  corrupt,  suggest- 
ing "fort,  grate." 

135  Cf.  Tibullische  Blatter,  p.  91.  -   ' 

136  Beitrage  zur  Erklarung  der  romischen  Elegiker,  Berlin,  1893,  p.  22 ; 
and  Wochenschrift  fur  Phil.,  2  (1885),  598.  He  also  thought  that  perhaps 
votis  should  be  iunctis. 

137  Zeitschr.  f.  Gymnasialwesen,  39  (1885),  225. 

138  C.  M.  Francken  (Mnemos.  n.s.,  13,  185)  believes  that  the  thought 
should  be  to  this  effect: 

sic  iuveni  gratae,  veniet  cum  proximus  annus, 
his  palam  votis  arbiter  adsit  Amor. 
wPhilol,  54  (1895),  458-9. 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  219 

This  list,  an  incomplete  one,  should  perhaps  be  sufficient  to 
deter  one  from  a  fresh  attempt,  but  it  shows  at  any  rate  that 
the  reading  of  the  distich  is  not  yet  settled. 

In  the  reading  proposed  the  word  est  is  inserted  after  grata; 
the  text  at  present  is  unmetrical,  and  it  is  obvious  that  est  could 
readily  be  dropped,  particularly  if  si  became  altered  to  sis  or  sit, 
thus  demanding  the  elimination  of  the  following  verb.140  This 
clause  is  the  protasis  of  the  condition,  and  the  citm-clause  is  a 
part  of  the  apodosis,  i.e.,  "if  she  is  dear  to  the  youth,  then  when 
the  next  year  comes,  etc."  Iuveni  is  of  course  Cerinthus,  as  in 
verse  8  of  this  elegy;  and  the  feminine  subject  of  est  implied 
in  grata  is  the  docta  puella  of  verse  2,  ilia  of  verses  5,  10  and  16. 

There  is,  to  be  sure,  no  certain  instance  of  gratus  referring 
to  a  person  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum;  though  it  may  be  that 
in  II,  5,  68  the  reading  of  A  (grata)  is  correct,  and  Herophile 
Phoebo  grata  would  be  parallel  to  this  passage.  We  do  find 
gratus  with  a  dependent  dative  in  III,  7  (IV,  1),  8-9,  but  modify- 
ing a  non-personal  noun :  etiam  Phoebo  gratissima  dona  Cres 
tulit.  But  outside  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum  the  instances  are 
numerous  enough : 

Ovid  Fast.  Ill,  467-8  inter  eaptivas  facie  praestante  puellas 
grata  nimis  Baccho  filia  regis  erat. 
Am.  II,  19,  30  factast,  quam  fuerat,  gratior  ilia  Iovi. 
Fast.  Ill,  495  vitio  tibi  gratior  ipso  est. 

Met.  VIII,  771  Nympha  sub  hoc  ego  sum  Cereri  gratissima  ligno. 
Met.  XIII,  528  proles  gratissima  matri. 
Horace  C.  I,  10,  19-20  superis  deorum  gratus    (Mercurius)    et  imis. 

C.  Ill,  9,  1  donee  gratus  eram  tibi. 
Propertius  I,  2,  31  his  tu  semper  eris  nostrae  gratissima  vitae.141 

In  other  words,  we  have  that  meaning  that  Pichon  refers  to 
when  he  says,  "Ad  personas  hoc  verbum  (gratus)  refertur  quae 
carae  sunt  amantibus. ' ' 


140  Voss  says:  "In  anderen  (Handschriften)  war  et  veniet  verderbt  in 
est  veniet  und  eveniet, ' '  and  again :  "  In  den  meinigen  verschrieb  einer  '  Sic 
iuveni  grata  est';  einer  'si  iuveni  grata  est.'  "  Broukhusius  also  says: 
"grata  est  unus  St."  According  to  Heyne,  Guelf.  3  read:  "Si  iuveni 
grata  est,  veniet  cum  etc."  Belling  (Prol.,  p.  70)  says:  "Soviel  ist  sicher, 
dass  an  der  Commissur  der  Worte  grata  und  veniet  ein  Fehler  der  tiber- 
lieferung  steckt. " 

1*1  Note  also  Prop.  I,  12,  7,  "olim  gratus  eram." 


220  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.    [Vol.  2 

The  fact  that  the  CMm-clause  is  taken  as  modifying  the  fol- 
lowing wish  and  not  as  dependent  upon  the  protasis  which  it 
immediately  succeeds,  may  seem  unusual,  and  yet  there  are 
several  instances  of  such  a  use  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  Thus 
in  I,  4,  49-50 : 

nee,  velit  insidiis  altas  si  claudere  valles, 
dum  placeas,  umeri  retia  ferre  negeDt. 

the  second  clause  does  not  depend  upon  the  first,  which,  it  may 

incidentally  be  noted,  is  a  si-clause  as  here.    Again,  in  I,  6,  41-2 : 

quisquis  et  occurret,  ne  possit  crimen  habere, 
stet  procul  ante,  alia  stet  procul  ante  via. 

the  we-clause  modifies,  not  the  preceding,   but  the  succeeding 

clause.    And  I,  8,  65-6 : 

dum  mini  venturam  fingo,  quodcumque  movetur, 
illius  credo  tunc  sonuisse  pedes. 

shows  the  same  usage.  And  the  elegy  preceding  the  one  under 
discussion,  namely  III,  11  (IV,  5)  shows  something  rather 
similar  in  verses  5-6  : 

iuvat  hoc,  Cerinthe,  quod  uror, 
si  tibi  de  nobis  mutuus  ignis  adest. 

for  the  second  subordinate  clause  does  not  depend  upon  the 

clause  immediately  preceding. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  meaning  of  the  clause  as  a  whole :  "  If 

she  is  dear  to  the  youth,  then,  etc."    It  is,  however,  clearly  felt 

that  the  love  is  reciprocated,  or  else  verse  7 : 

at  tu,  sancta,  fave,  neu  quis  divellat  amantes. 

would  be  inappropriate ;  and  even  more  convincing  is  verse  11 : 

nee  possit  cupidos  vigilans  deprendere  custos. 

Therefore  the  expression  means:  "If  she  is  dear  to  the  youth 

(and  she  surely  is),  then,  etc."    The  previous  elegy,  which  has 

so  many  correspondences  with  this  one,  contains  a  thought  closely 

parallel  to  this  in  verses  9-10 : 

mane  Geni,  cape  tura  libens  votisque  faveto, 
si  modo,  cum  de  me  cogitat,  ille  calet.1*2 

Here  si  modo  ....  ille  calet  is  parallel  to  si  iuveni  grata  est; 
note  further  that  the  conclusion  to  this  protasis  is  in  part  votis 


1*2  But  the  expressions  of  confidence  in  Cerinthus'  love  are  far  stronger 
in  III,  12  (IV,  6). 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianurn.  221 

faveto,  as  in  verse  20  of  our  passage  it  is  votis  ....  adsit  amor. 
In  other  words,  it  is  only  if  he  loves  her  (and  the  writer  of  this 
elegy  feels  that  he  does)  that  the  speaker  wishes  the  prayers 
granted. 

Next  stands  the  clause  veniet  cum  proximus  annus.  As  these 
prayers  are  offered  upon  her  birthday,  clearly  this  must  mean 
"when  her  next  birthday  comes."  So  also  in  verse  20  the  vota 
are  those  to  be  offered  up  on  that  next  birthday,  as  Heyne  points 
out:  "Vota  versu  ultimo  intellige,  quae  puella  proximo  anno 
eadem  die  conceptura  est."  These  birthday  prayers  are  fre- 
quently alluded  to  in  the  Corpus :  thus  II,  2,  9-10  (note  also  vota, 
v.  17)  ;  III,  11  (IV,  5),  and  in  particular  v.  9  votisque  faveto; 
III,  12  (IV,  6)  itself;  and  I,  7,  the  birthday  poem  to  Messalla. 
It  is  interesting  to  compare  Ovid  Tristia  III,  13,  and  particularly 

verse  18 : 

concipiamque  bonas  ore  favente  preces? 

as  well  as  Ovid  Tristia  V,  5,  in  which  after  the  introductory 

verses  the  prayer  begins  in  verse  13 : 

optime  Natalis,  quamvis  procul  absumus,  opto 
candidus  hue  venias  dissimilisque  meo,  etc. 

The  expression  votis  adsit  amor  means,  I  believe,  "may  love 

be  present  at  her  (next  birthday-)  prayers,"  i.e.,  "may  the  love 

still  exist  when  the  prayers  are  offered  up  on  her  next  birthday. ' ' 

While  there  are  not  a  great  many  instances  of  adesse  with  its 

subject  non-personal  as  well  as  the  dative  used  with  it,  still  a 

number  of  them  is  found.143     In  most  of  these,  however,  the 

meaning  of  adesse  does  not  appear  very  different  from  that  of 

esse.    But  in  the  following  instances  the  true  force  of  adesse  is 

clearly  shown : 

Virgil  Aen.  X,  547-8  vimque  adfore  verbo  crediderat.144 

Ovid  Her.  XIV,  10  quaeque  aderant  sacris,  (pater)  tendat  in  ora  faees. 

lam  vetus  appears  inappropriate  to  me,  as  it  did  to  Prien, 
Baehrens,  and  Francken.  If  the  love  is  "already  old,"  not  a  hint 
to  that  effect  is  given  in  the  elegies;  if,  on  the  other  hand,  iam 
vetus  is  taken  to  mean,  as  it  usually  is,  "by  that  time  old,"  what 


*4s  See  Thesaurus  Linguae  Latinae,  assum. 

144  Conington,  "he  thought  that  his  prowess  would  second  his  word." 


222  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

point  is  there  in  the  addition  of  these  words?     What  does  the 
prayer  gain  by  having  this  idea  added  to  it  ? 

The  change  palaeographically  to  mutuus  is  much  less  difficult 
than  it  appears  at  first  sight.  If  in  copying,  the  m  were 
separated  from  the  rest  of  the  word,  we  should  have  remaining 
utuus.  If  we  place  beside  each  other  utuus  and  uetus,  the  close 
resemblance  becomes  apparent ;  both  are  not  only  words  of  five 
letters,  but  in  fact  contain  exactly  the  same  letters,  with  a  single 
exception,  arranged  in  a  slightly  different  order.  The  m  remain- 
ing by  itself  would  then  be  expanded  into  the  "Flickwort"  iam. 

The  word  mutuus  is  a  favorite  one  in  this  group  of  elegies; 
thus  in  verse  8  of  this  elegy,  we  have  mutua  vincla,  and  in 
III,  11  (IV,  5)  we  have  in  verse  6  mutuus  ignis  adest  and  in 
the  next  verse  this  very  group  of  words,  mutuus  adsit  amor. 
This  very  correspondence  may  be  urged  as  an  objection  to  the 
proposed  reading,  but  it  might  be  claimed  that  such,  an  objec- 
tion would  in  some  measure  apply  to  the  substitution  of  adsit 
for  the  MS  esset,  which  gives  us  these  two  words  in  precisely  the 
same  order  as  in  III,  11  (IV,  5).  And  yet  this  change  is  made 
by  practically  every  editor  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  More- 
over, in  III,  11  (IV,  5)  we  have  mutuus  ignis  adest  followed 
immediately  by  mutuus  adsit  amor 

But,  aside  from  this,  is  not  the  prayer  that  the  mutual  love 
may  only  last,  a  frequently  recurring  one  in  these  elegies?  Cf. 
e.g.  Ill,  10  (IV,  4),  16: 

tu  modo  semper  ama:  salva  puella  tibi  est. 
This  fear  that  Cerinthus'  love  may  not  last  we  find  again  in 
III,  17  (IV,  11). 

The  distich  then  as  a  whole  would  mean:  "If  she  is  dear  to 
the  youth  (and  she  really  is),  then  at  the  coming  of  the  next 
year  may  this  same  mutual  affection  exist  when  the  birthday- 
prayers  are  offered  up." 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  223 


III,  14  (IV,  8),  5-6 

Proposed  reading: 

iam,  nimium  Messalla  mei  studiose,  quiescas : 
non  tempestivae  saepe,  propinque,  viae. 

The  reading  above  is  that  of  the  MSS,  save  that  for  non  £, 
AVG  read  neu.  Sepc  propinque  is  read  in  compendium  in  A. 
The  reading  given  is  moreover  that  of  the  large  majority  of  the 
editors,  who,  however,  place  a  comma  after  quiescas,  and  remove 
that  after  saepe.  Those  who  read  thus  are  Muretus,  Scaliger, 
Grasser,  Broukhusius,  Maittaire,  Heyne,  Huschke,  Golbery, 
Lachmann,  Dissen,  Gruppe,  L.  Mueller,  Haupt-Vahlen,  and 
Belling;145  of  these,  however,  Heyne,  Huschke,  and  Dissen  feel 
that  something  is  wrong  in  the  pentameter.  Heyne  proposes 
non  tempestivam  sic  properare  viam.  Baehrens  and  Postgate140 
both  mark  saepe  propinque  as  corrupt,  though  in  his  Selections, 
Postgate  accepts  non  ....  saeve  propinque  (the  conjecture  of 
R.  Unger)  as  a  "stop-gap."  Baehrens147  suggested  perge  monere 
(retaining  neu),  which  Hiller148  accepted  and  inserted  into  his 
text.    Jurenka  would  read :  neu  tempestivae  saepe  moneto  viae. 

Rigler,  at  first  accepting  non  tempestivae,  saeve  propinque, 
viae,  later  proposed  non  tempestivae,  quae  procul  urbe,  viae. 
Ayrmann,  Vit.  Tib.,  §  82  suggested  non  tempestivae  simque  pro- 
pinqua  viae.  Francken  read  for  saepe  propinque,  parce,  pro- 
pinque.%**  Cartault  (1909)  proposed  seu  tempestivast,  sive 
propinqua  via.150 

In  these  various  readings  viae  is  taken  either  as  a  genitive 


us  But  with  no  punctuation  save  a  colon  after  viae. 

i*6  He  proposes  in  the  Journal  of  Philology,  25,  64,  semper  amice  for 
saepe  propinque. 

**'  Baehrens  thought  the  following  possible:  "quiescas  Ceu  tempestivae, 
saeve  propinque,  viae." 

i*8  In  the  Corpus  poetarum  Latinorum  (1893)  it  is  marked  corrupt. 
lioMnemos.  n.s.,  13   (1885),  186. 

iso  Statius  suggested  fugae  for  viae.  Heyne  made  a  second  suggestion: 
"non  tempestive  saepe  propinque  tuae. "  Voss  read  as  the  majority  of 
the  editors,  substituting  however  nee  for  non,  and  tempestive  for  tem- 
pestivae. After  this  paper  was  in  print,  I  noted  the  proposal  of  J.  J.  Hart- 
man,  Mnemos.  n.s.  39  (1911),  399,  Non  tempestiva  est,  saeve  propinque  via. 


224  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

depending  upon  quiescas,151  or  as  depending  upon  propinque. 
Thus  Scaliger:  "Qui  saepe  te  aceingis  itineri  intempestivo." 

The  reading  suggested  by  me  follows  the  MS  reading,  save 
in  substituting  non  for  neu.  A  colon  is,  however,  placed  after 
quiescas,  and  by  putting  a  comma  both  before  and  after 
propinque,  saepe  is  completely  separated  from  it  in  construction. 
The  verse  non  tempestivae  saepe,  propinque,  viae  would  then  be 
translated:  "Journeys  are  often  unseasonable,  kinsman." 

The  only  other  instances  of  quiescere  in  the  Corpus  Tibul- 

lianum  are  II,  4,  49,  and  II,  6,  30,  and  in  neither  of  these  do  we 

have  a  noun  used  directly  with  it  or  an  infinitive,  but  the  use  in 

each  case  parallels  that  proposed : 

II,  4,  49  et  'bene'  discedens  dicet  'placideque  quiescas.' 
II,  6,  30  sic  bene  sub  tenera  parva  quiescat  humo.  «■ 

The  ellipsis  of  sunt  which  has  been  assumed  is  quite  in  accord 
with  usages  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  In  discussing  the  read- 
ing of  I,  5,  76  (page  182),  the  instances  of  ellipses  of  esse  in  the 
Corpus  Tibullianum  are  classified  under  four  heads,  of  which 
the  third  "comprises  those  cases  wherein  a  predicate  noun  or 
adjective  occurs,"  which  is  the  condition  we  have  in  this  verse. 
The  following  instances  fell  under  this  head : 

I,  1,  75  hie  ego  dux  milesque  bonus. 

I,  3,  43  non  fixus  in  agris, 

qui  regeret  certis  finibus  arva,  lapis. 
I,  7  9  foil.  Tarbella  Pyrene 

testis  et  Oceani  litora  Santonici, 
testis  Arar  Khodanusque  celer  magnusque  Garunna, 
Carnutis  et  flavi  caerula  lympha  Liger. 
I,  10,  26  (text  dubious)  hostiaque  e  plena  rustica  porcus  hara. 

I,  10,  63  quater  ille  beatus 

quo  tenera  irato  flere  puella  potest. 

II,  1,  79  a  miseri,  quos  hie  graviter  deus  urget! 
II,  1,  80  at  ille 

felix,  cui  placidus  leniter  adflat  Amor. 

II,  5,  107  ars  bona! 

III,  2,  5  non  ego  firmus  in  hoc. 

Ill,  4,  51-2  tantum  cara  tibi  quantum  nee  filia  matri, 
quantum  nee  cupido  bella  puella  viro. 
Ill,  4,  94  isque  pater,  quo  non  alter  amabilior. 

i5i  Postgate,  Selections:  "viae  gen.  after  quiescas.  'cease  from  un- 
reasonable travel,'  i.e.,  give  up  the  journey,  an  imitation  of  the  Greek 
construction." 


1912]         Deutsch. — Notes  on  the  Text  of  the  Corpus  Tibullianum.  225 

III,  6,  19  nee  torvus  Liber  in  illis. 

Ill,  6,  43  felix,  quicumque  dolore 

alterius  disces  posse  cavere  tuo. 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  9-10  et  cunctis  Baccho  iucundior  hosjtes 

I  cams. 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  40  nee  tamen  hie  aut  hie  tibi  laus  maiorve  minorve. 

Ill,  7  (IV,  1),  107  foil.  testis  mihi  victae 

fortis  lapydiae  miles,  testis  quoque  fallax 
Pannonius,  gelidas  passim  disiectus  in  Alpes, 
testis  Arupinis  et  pauper  natus  in  arvis. 

Ill,  19  (IV,  13),  11   tu  mihi  curarum  requies,  tu  nocte  vel  atra 
lumen,  et  in  solis  tu  mihi  turba  locis. 

In  the  group  of  elegies  by  Sulpicia  we  find  the  following  in- 
stances of  an  omission  of  esse : 

III,  15  (IV,  9),  1:  in  a  compound  verb-form. 

Ill,  16  (IV,  10),  3-4:  where  another  form  of  esse  is  found  in  the 
same  sentence. 

In  other  words,  ellipses  of  esse  of  this  type  are  frequent  in  the 

Corpus  Tibullianum,  and  while  none  appears  in  the  poems  by 

Sulpicia,  yet  in  this  small  group  of  elegies  there  are  two  instances 

of  the  omission  of  esse. 

It  may  be  objected  that  the  thought  in  this  verse  is  not  a  very 

profound  one,  but  generalizations  and  those  too  not  very  abstruse 

are  not  uncommon  throughout  the  Corpus.    Thus,  for  an  example 

of  such  a  generalization  following  a  command  (cf.  this  distich), 

we  have  in  III,  10  (IV,  4),  15: 

pone  metum,  Cerinthe:  deus  non  laedit  amantes. 

Compare  also : 

III,  2,  6     frangit  fortia  corda  dolor. 

Ill,  3,  20  falso  plurima  vulgus  amat. 

Ill,  3,  21  non  opibus  mentes  hominum  curaeque  levantur. 

Ill,  4,  63  mens  est  mutabilis  illis. 

Ill,  4,  76  vincuntur  molli  pectora  dura  prece. 

Ill,  6,  34  difficile  est  tristi  fingere  mente  iocum. 

Ill,  14  (IV,  8),  3  dulcius  urbe  quid  est? 

I,  4,  28  non  segnis  stat  remeatque  dies. 

I,  4,  77  gloria  cuique  sua  est. 

While  it  must  be  admitted  that  saepe  holds  this  position  in 
the  verse  nowhere  else  in  the  Corpus  Tibullianum,  yet  it  may  be 
noted  that  of  fifty-two  instances152   of  saepe   in   Propertius,153 


152  Including  II,  25,  12. 

153  See  Phillimore,  Index  Verborum  Propertianus. 


226  University  of  California  Publications  in  Classical  Philology.     [Vol.  2 

twenty-one  appear  in  exactly  the  position  saepe  has  here,  i.e., 
immediately  following  the  diaeresis  in  the  pentameter,  and  thirty- 
one  in  all  other  possible  positions. 

Moreover  I  have  come  upon  two  cases  where  saepe  and  pro- 
pi nquus  stand  next  to  each  other,  and  in  neither  case  does  saepe 
modify  propinquus : 

Propertius  IT,  6,  7  quin  otiam  t'alsos  fingis  tibi  saepe  propinquos. 
Martial  IX,  54,  11-12  (which  is  more  interesting  because  the  words 
appear  in  the  same  position  in  the  pentameter  as  in  the  verse 
under  consideration): 

mittimus  ergo  tibi  parvae  minuscula  chortis. 
qualia  si  recipis,  saepe  propinquus  eris. 

As  to  the  exact  relationship  that  Messalla  bore  to  Sulpicia, 
that  cannot  of  course  be  determined  with  certainty,  but 
Haupt's154  suggestion  that  Valeria,  the  sister  of  M.  Valerius 
Messalla  Corvinus  (the  Messalla  of  this  elegy),  who  married 
Servius  Sulpicius,155  was  the  mother  of  Sulpicia,  seems  likely. 


Transmitted  January  8,  1912 


is*  Haupt,    Opuscula,   iii,   502-3,   number   lxii,    which    is   the    same    as 
Hermes,  5  (1871),  32-4. 

155  Cf.  Ill,  16  (IV,  10),  4. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  PUBLICATIONS— (Continued) 

EGYPTL4.N  ARCHAEOLOGY.     (Quarto.) 

Vol.  1.    The  Hearst  Medical  Papyru3.    Hieratic  Text  in  17  facsimile  plates  in  collotype, 

with  Introduction  and  Vocabulary,  by  George  A.  Reisner.    48  pages.    1905    25  marks 
Vol.  2.    The  Early  Dynastic  Cemeteries  of  Naga-ed-DSr,  Part  I,  by  G.  A.  Reisner.    172 

pages,  80  plates,  211  text-figures.    1908  -75  marks 

Vol.  3.    The  Early  Dynastic  Cemeteries  at  Naga-ed-D6r,  Part  IL  by  A.  0.  Mace,    xi  + 

88  pages,  with  60  plates  and  123  text-figureB.    1909 50  marks 

For  sale  by  J.  C.  Hinrichs  Verlag,  Leipzig,  Germany.  Copies  for  exchange  may  be 
obtained  from  the  University  Press,  Berkeley. 

SEMITIC  PHILOLOGY.— William  Popper,  Editor. 
Vol.  1.    1907-.     (In  progress.) 

1.  The  Supposed  Hebraisms  in  the  Grammar  of  Biblical  Aramaic,  by 

Herbert  Harry  Powell.    Pp.  1-55.    February,  1907 „ 75 

Vol.  2.    1909— (In  progress.) 

1.  Ibn  Taghri  Birdi:  An-Nujum  az-ZahirS  fi  Muluk  Misr  wal-Kahira  (No. 

1  of  Vol.  2,  part  2).    Edited  by  William  Popper.     Pp.  1-128.    Sep- 
tember, 1909 - 1.60 

2.  Idem  (No.  2  of  Vol.  2,  part  2).    Pp.  129-297.    October,  1910 1.50 

The  publication  of  this  text  will  be  continued.  European  orders  for  the  parts  of  this 
volume  as  published  may  be  sent  to  Late  E.  J.  Brill,  Ltd.,  Leiden. 

MODERN  PHILOLOGY.— -Charles  M.  Gayley,  Lucien  Foulet,  and  Hugo  BL  Schilling,  Edi- 
tors.   Price  per  volume  $2.50. 
Vol.  1.    1.  Der  Junge  Goethe  und  das  Publikum,  by  W.  R.  R.  Pinger.    Pp.  1-67. 

May,  1909 50 

"2.  Studies  in  the  Marvellous,  by  Benjamin  P.  Kurtz.    Pp.  69-244.    March 

17,  1910  $2.00 

3.  Introduction  to  the  Philosophy  of  Art,  by  Arthur  Weiss.    Pp.  245-302. 

January  12,  1910 _ - 50 

4.  The  Old  English  Christian  Epic,  by  George  A.  Smithson.    Pp.  303-400. 

September  30,  1910  - 1.00 

Vol.  2.    1.  Wilhelm  Busch  als  Dichter,  Kunstler,  Psychologe,  und  Philosoph,  von 

Fritz  Winther.    Pp.  1-79.    September  26,  1910 75 

2.  The  Critics  of  Edmund  Spenser,  by  Herbert  E.  Cory.     Pp.   81-182. 

June  30,  1911  1-00 

3.  Some  Forms  of  the  Riddle  Question  and  the  Exercise  of  the  Wits  in 

Popular  Fiction  and  Formal  Literature,  by  Rudolph  Schevill.    Pp. 
183-237.    November  2,  1911 : 50 

MEMOIRS  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  (Quarto). 

Vol.  1.  1.  Triassic  Ichthyosauria,  with  special  reference  to  the  American  Forms, 
by  John  C.  Merriam.  Pp.  1-196;  plates  1-18;  154  text-figures.  Sep- 
tember, 1908 < - $3.00 

2.        Silva  of  California,  by  W.  L.  Jepson.    Pp.  480;  plates  85.    December, 
1910.    $9;  buckram,  $10;  carriage  extra. 

Other  series  in  Classical  Philology,  Education,  Engineering,  Entomology,  Egyptian 
Archaeology,  Graeco-Roman  Archaeology,  History,  Modern  Philology,  Philosophy,  Semitic 
Philology. 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  CHRONICLE.— An  official  record  of  University  life, 
issued  quarterly,  edited  by  a  committee  of  the  Faculty.  Price  §  1  per  year.  Current 
volume  No.  XTv". 

Address  all  orders  or  requests  for  information  concerning  the  above  publications  to  The 
University  Press,  Berkeley,  California. 

European  agent  for  the  series  in  American  Archaeology  and  Ethnology,  Classical  Phil- 
ology, Education,  Modern  Philology,  Philosophy,  and  Semitic  Philology,  Otto  Harrassowitz, 
Leipzig.  For  the  Memoirs,  and  the  series  in  Botany,  Geology,  Pathology,  Physiology, 
Zoology  and  also  American  Archaeology  and  Ethnology,  R.  Friedlander  &  Sohn,  Berlin. 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 

AN     INITIAL     FINE     OF     25     CENTS 

™mBBn    ASSESSED    FOR    FA.LURE  TO» 
TH.S  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.      THE  PENALTY 

^AYLANDRroSE  T°  5°  CENTS  °N  ™E  ™«™ 

oCerdue.  °N   ™E   SEVENTH    day 


SEP   28    1*32 


LD  21-50m-8,32 


/ 


244548 


